# Chord Electronics Qutest DAC - Official Thread



## ChordElectronics (Sep 16, 2019)

*CHORD ELECTRONICS ARE PROUD TO ANNOUNCE









*​
Qutest is a UK-made standalone digital-to-analogue converter based on our multi-award-winning Hugo 2 technology.

Qutest doesn’t follow the norm, it sets the standard with a brand new compact chassis design by John Franks with a stunning black finish, making it ideal for desktop environments. It benefits from a huge 49,152-tap filter, 10-element Pulse Array design by forum regular Rob Watts and features over 750x the processing power of DAC-chip rivals.

The new Qutest greatly improves on the previous 2Qute and user comments on the forum have helped shape its development. New filter options just like on Hugo 2 are now available, helping to tailor the sound. A front-mounted input selector switch makes source swapping simple: multiple sources can connect with seamlessly transition between devices. Plus, press both the ‘Filter’ and ‘Source’ buttons together at start-up and select from a variable output voltage of 1V, 2V, or 3V!




Pair Qutest with your headphone amplifier to tailor the sound to your liking, or connect to your amplifier for the purest audio experience, you can also upgrade streamers, CD transports/players and most digitally connected devices. Plus, there’s no discriminating against DAPs - Qutest supports Android, iOS, Windows, Apple OS X and Linux devices.

Qutest supports all major commercially available file formats up to 768kHz PCM and native DSD tracks to 512 (Octa-DSD).

Availability: Available for pre-order now

Price: £1195.00

Visit the Chord Electronics website for more information


----------



## Bulbsofpassion

£1995.00 ?!


----------



## Music Alchemist

Bulbsofpassion said:


> £1995.00 ?!



No, £1195. (~$1,600 USD.)


----------



## seeteeyou

Just adding my 2 cents, it's OK to drive sensitive speakers (e.g. Omega and Voxativ) and headphones directly with the RCA outputs of Quetest





Beolab said:


> A late night recommendation:
> 
> Connected different sensitive headphones direct to the RCA outlets on the 2Qute, and used my streamer with bit perfect digital vol, and it sounds very good!


Regarding volume control under Windows 10 etc.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...rd-2qute/?page=14&tab=comments#comment-667497


> With the limited one op-amp up to 3V (line level) and having to use JRiver for volume control, I find I need to convert DSD on the fly to PCM 192, in order to control volume digitally.


----------



## Bulbsofpassion

@Music Alchemist Ah @ChordElectronics updated this, originally it said £1995.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 9, 2018)

Nevermind,
What is the minimum requirements for 5V or does it need the full power input?  Not so excited about the micro power input, to be honest.  Now I'm thinking Hugo 2 over this??  With the micro power input and no volume control.


----------



## Music Alchemist

elviscaprice said:


> Why the short tap length as the current 2Qute?



The tap length is 49,152; same as the Hugo 2.


----------



## iDesign (Jan 9, 2018)

If the Qutest had a headphone input, I suspect Chord would have had an even bigger success.


----------



## Bulbsofpassion

elviscaprice said:


> Nevermind,
> What is the minimum requirements for 5V or does it need the full power input?  Not so excited about the micro power input, to be honest.



Supplied charger is 5v 2A So I'd imagine it needs that. What's the problem with a Micro USB connection?


----------



## elviscaprice

Bulbsofpassion said:


> Supplied charger is 5v 2A So I'd imagine it needs that. What's the problem with a Micro USB connection?


Alot, it's not exactly an ideal setup for a low impedance source.  Of course Rob is going to say that power supply doesn't matter, again.


----------



## Bulbsofpassion

elviscaprice said:


> Alot, it's not exactly an ideal setup for a low impedance source.  Of course Rob is going to say that power supply doesn't matter, again.


I'm sure you could replace the power supply with whatever you want, the fact it would have to be terminated with a micro-USB connector really shouldn't make a difference should it?


----------



## AndrewOld

What are the dual BNC inputs for? Surely not a Blu2?


----------



## elviscaprice

Bulbsofpassion said:


> I'm sure you could replace the power supply with whatever you want, the fact it would have to be terminated with a micro-USB connector really shouldn't make a difference should it?


Yes and no, concerning impedance.  
Really it makes sense that Chord uses this input, micro, for power.  It alleviates the dummy error using improper power supply.


----------



## seeteeyou

Some of us already own UpTone Audio UltraCap LPS-1 and it's relatively easy to add an adapter for StarQuad DC power cables






However, it's very important to find out whether Qutest is consuming more than 5 watts or otherwise. LPS-1 is only good enough for 5.5 watts.

Regarding 2Qute, we're able to get away with  two units of LPS-1 connected in parallel (7V + 5V = 12V) to provide up to 13.2 watts continuously. Actually the manual stated 0.5A @ 12V or 6 watts

https://chordelectronics.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/2Qute-User-Manual.pdf#page=4


----------



## Music Alchemist

AndrewOld said:


> What are the dual BNC inputs for? Surely not a Blu2?



Yep.


----------



## 514077

AndrewOld said:


> What are the dual BNC inputs for? Surely not a Blu2?


Why not?  The way Chord seems to be going with all its new DACs.  Read @Raydude's review with the Blu2.


----------



## maxh22

This DAC really is the Qutest little bugger Chord has produced.

It looks like a BluQute is the cheapest road to a million taps, now the question remains, with the stock (or upgraded PSU) will it make Dave's power supply refinements and componentry largely irrelevant in a two channel setup?


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 9, 2018)

Where to buy in US?

"Qutest supports all major commercially available file formats up to 768kHz PCM and native DSD tracks to 512 (Octa-DSD)."


----------



## AndrewOld (Jan 9, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> This DAC really is the Qutest little bugger Chord has produced.
> 
> It looks like a BluQute is the cheapest road to a million taps, now the question remains, with the stock (or upgraded PSU) will it make Dave's power supply refinements and componentry largely irrelevant in a two channel setup?



The cheapest road to a million taps would be a stand alone M Scaler without a redundant cd mechanism and unnecessarily over engineered case. And a way of connecting it that didn’t involve two dozen ferrites. That would good engineering too.


----------



## JWahl (Jan 9, 2018)

seeteeyou said:


> Some of us already own UpTone Audio UltraCap LPS-1 and it's relatively easy to add an adapter for StarQuad DC power cables
> 
> However, it's very important to find out whether Qutest is consuming more than 5 watts or otherwise. LPS-1 is only good enough for 5.5 watts.
> 
> ...



I checked the site for the LPS-1 and it looks like it's limited to 1A of current.  It seems that the Qutest needs 2A since it's running at the lower 5V.


----------



## Music Alchemist

I created a Head Gear page for the Qutest. Reviewers can publish their reviews there in the future.

https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/chord-qutest.22853/


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 9, 2018)

I'm guessing the "filter" button is what changes the output voltage, or maybe a more complex hold "input" then hit "filter...?"

EDIT:  Just read Chord page, press both together.


----------



## Rob Watts

A 2A supply is shipped with qutest, but it will work fine with a 1A 5V supply.

To set the OP voltage you press the two buttons together when it's starting up - display in rainbow mode - then qutest will remain in that level. Pressing the buttons together will change the brightness of the display when in normal or working mode.


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> A 2A supply is shipped with qutest, but it will work fine with a 1A 5V supply.
> 
> To set the OP voltage you press the two buttons together when it's starting up - display in rainbow mode - then qutest will remain in that level. Pressing the buttons together will change the brightness of the display when in normal or working mode.



 Thank you so much I am ready to buy as soon as its available in US!


----------



## Rob Watts

dawktah2 said:


> Thank you so much I am ready to buy as soon as its available in US!


Qutest is in production now. So delivery to dealers will be in February.


----------



## Music Alchemist

I really hope the US price will be matched to the UK!

Here's a nice wallpaper.


----------



## dmance (Jan 9, 2018)

i see that Qutest measures slightly differently than Hugo2

*Hugo2 vs Qutest  (from Chord website)*

Channel separation: 135dB at 1kHz 300Ω *vs *138dB at 1kHz 300ohms
Signal to noise ratio: 126dB ‘A’ Weighted *vs *124dB A-Weighted
THD and noise at 3v RMS: 120dB at 1kHz 300ohms ‘A’ weighted (reference 5.3v) *vs *THD (2.5v RMS ref 3v): 117dB 300ohms A-Weighted
THD: <0.0001% 1kHz 3v RMS 300Ω *vs *0.0001% 1kHz 2.5v RMS 300ohms

Id be interested to have @Rob Watts comments.


----------



## theveterans

Does Qutest support Blu MK2 M-scaler?


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 9, 2018)

theveterans said:


> Does Qutest support Blu MK2 M-scaler?



Yes. That's what the dual BNC inputs are for.

With this combo, you get all 1,015,808 taps, though the Qutest is obviously not as good as the DAVE.


----------



## jayz

Waiting for the 1st review. Getting one nevertheless, nothing like experiencing it in my own room and setup.


----------



## Jimi Zine

Will the Qutest handle DSD native on a mac too? (as oppose to Mojo's DoP)


----------



## x RELIC x

Jimi Zine said:


> Will the Qutest handle DSD native on a mac too? (as oppose to Mojo's DoP)



It won’t matter audibly. DSD _over_ PCM (not _converted_ to PCM) was created as a way to fool the USB interface to allow DSD transmition without drivers because the USB protocol doesn’t recognize DSD (it does recognize PCM). When a DAC sees a DoP signal it discards the PCM marker and plays the original DSD data contained _unchanged from the original_.

Basically DoP was created as a way to get around USB drivers, but coaxial and optical can use it as well. 

Some reading:

https://www.northstar.it/dsd-native-vs-dop/

https://www.dcsltd.co.uk/support/what-is-dop-dsd-over-pcm/


----------



## Pokemonn (Jan 17, 2018)

deleted


----------



## jwbrent

Very interesting. I was hoping for an updated replacement for the 2Qute to use in my speaker system. Can’t justify the cost of a DAVE, but I certainly can afford a Qutest. February is just around the corner ...


----------



## jwbrent

I would need a short micro USB to USB-B cable in order to connect my AK240SS as a transport, but they’re not easy to find without using an adapter. I wonder if Chord is packing in cables.

 Also, if anyone knows a source for a high quality USB of the type I’m describing, I’m all ears.


----------



## Rob Watts

dmance said:


> i see that Qutest measures slightly differently than Hugo2
> 
> *Hugo2 vs Qutest  (from Chord website)*
> 
> ...



The separation spec for Hugo 2 is worst case spec; my presentation gave it 144 dB, slightly better than Qutest. Having said that, separation spec is irrelevant - what is important is distortion from the other chanell - and both have none. Distortion on the separation test would indicate crosstalk via the PSU.

Signal to noise is exactly as expected. When I design a DAC, there is a detailed calculation of all sources of noise on the analogue section, assuming the DAC is disabled - the pulse array element resistors are set to DC - half to ground, half to the reference voltage. The vast majority of the noise is simply resistor thermal noise (Nyquist Johnson noise). Any design I do must have a dynamic range that is within 1 dB of this calculated value as this will indicate that the DAC part is not jitter sensitive, nor are there any sources of noise within the DAC (like switching sources or PSU noise) leaching in. Both Hugo 2 and Qutest are within 0.5 dB of theoretical. Qutest is lower DR simply because of the gain being different (3v rather than 5.3v OP). Actually getting this performance can be frustrating - Hugo 2 took 5 new PCB's - Qutest took 2 boards. Interestingly, I discovered something new when fixing Qutest (a layout issue) as one ch was 2dB worse than the other one, on the first prototype. Production units are now within 0.5 dB of each other.

When a DAC design goes through the prototype development treadmill a huge amount of measurements get done. I do not finish a design until  some key metrics are passed - noise must be within 1dB of calculated; when the DAC is disabled it must be no better than 1dB (this proves no significant noise from the DAC itself); no measurable jitter artifacts using the source jitter test; no measurable noise floor modulation; no distortion via the other channel; and no in-band noise artifacts - the noise floor must be clean; no anharmonic distortion products (anharmonic distortion is distortion that is not a integer multiple of the fundamental - it is much more important than harmonic distortion). With all designs, there are often a lot of new prototypes that are needed to ensure all the above points pass.

Since the noise is 90% resistor value, why don't I simply half the values and get 3dB lower noise? Well problem is the actual impedance - there exists a tipping point when distortion will quadruple with halfing the resistor value. This distortion mechanism is understood but very complex, but basically with pulse array I choose the element resistor values so that I am just at the tipping point, so I get the lowest possible distortion - which can affect the sound quality (SQ). Fixed resistor noise is just hiss; it does not actually degrade the SQ.

THD and noise is consistent with noise being higher, and with distortion being slightly worse on Qutest due to DAC modulation index (2.5v against 3v max qutest, 3v against 5.3v Hugo 2 - Hugo 2 at 2.5v is 0.00007% THD)


----------



## Rob Watts

Here is my Hugo 2 presentation updated to include Qutest.




 



 



 



 



 



 

So that covers all the slides that are common to Hugo 2 and Qutest, So the slides covering Qutest only next:



 



 



 



 



 

I hope that is useful information.

Rob


----------



## Clive101

jwbrent said:


> I would need a short micro USB to USB-B cable in order to connect my AK240SS as a transport, but they’re not easy to find without using an adapter. I wonder if Chord is packing in cables.
> 
> Also, if anyone knows a source for a high quality USB of the type I’m describing, I’m all ears.



Curious Cables.

http://www.curiouscables.com/buy.html

If you need any further info IMO best for price.


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> Here is my Hugo 2 presentation updated to include Qutest.
> 
> I hope that is useful information.
> 
> Rob



Yes, thank you! I am so appreciative of your input.


----------



## Rob Watts

I had a PM from @Music Alchemist  asking about the PSU structure worked, so am posting my reply here.

One of the issues I wanted to improve upon, when designing Hugo 2 was isolating the amplifier (this is the single module that combines DAC amplification, filtering and headphone drive into one single feedback loop)  from the battery. To do this, I created a booster voltage that was greater than the battery voltage, and then used low drop-out linear regulators to feed the amplifier gain section - the discrete output stage is connected to the battery, and it is signal dependent current drain from the OP stage that corrupts the battery voltage, which then feeds into the amplifier gain section - creating distortion. By separating the amplifier gain section from the noisy and distorted OP stage, you can eliminate this source of error. That is why Hugo 2 and Qutest both have very high channel separation, and more importantly no distortion from the other channel when it is playing into very low impedance loads. You can see the measured benefit of this from this slide:



 

Now this feature - of using a booster voltage, then seperate linear regulators to isolate the OP stage noise and distortion from the sensitive amplifier gain section - I have copied directly from Hugo 2 to Qutest. You may argue that this was unnecessary, as the distorted currents drawn on the power supply with Qutest is much lower - but this strategy worked so well I did not want to take the risk. And I know that distortion from the other chanel leaking through is a very important DAC issue - and having eliminated it with Hugo 2 I did not want the possibility of it degrading with a conventional PSU arrangement.

The other issue is with Hugo 2, adding the charger makes zero measured difference, and I could hear no change using HP in sound quality at all. So I replicated the design (it's actually complex with multiple RF filters and lots of separate regulators) from Hugo 2 into Qutest - but replacing Hugo 2's battery with a regulator.

Another point - like Hugo 2, Qutest has no coupling capacitors in the audio path at all. DC is kept to 100 uV by using my digital DC servo - the benefit of a digital servo is that I can remove all the distortion and noise from a conventional analogue servo digitally. The DC trim is then done digitally to the noise shaper inputs by applying a DC trim that has zero distortion and noise, as this has been filtered out digitally. The subjective benefit is of a very tight and deep bass - and measurement wise the distortion at 20 Hz is identical to 1 kHz - you normally see THD increasing with low frequencies hwn using coupling capacitors.

Rob


----------



## vrln (Jan 10, 2018)

Hoping to see a matching headphone amplifier later on to go along with the Qutest. That would form a nice small desktop friendly setup and also close a gap in the lineup that otherwise exists between Hugo 2 (no galvanic USB isolation) and a potentially much more expensive Hugo 2 TT... Any chance of a comment on this?


----------



## dmance

@Rob Watts
So appreciate you being back on-line in a big way with incredible contributions to chord product and technology knowledge.
Regarding the Qutest chassis - which is described in the literature as being more heavy and robust to reduce vibrations and hence isolation of the circuit board. 
Is this market-speak? ...or does this isolation benefit, in any way, the Qutest sound quality.
Thanks,
Dan


----------



## Rob Watts

If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that. And my listening tests with HP was that galvanic isolation was not required as the USB input sounded the same as optical. You only need galvanic isolation when driving amplifiers that are mains powered....


----------



## vrln (Jan 13, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that. And my listening tests with HP was that galvanic isolation was not required as the USB input sounded the same as optical. You only need galvanic isolation when driving amplifiers that are mains powered....



Thanks for the reply! Sounds like a significant improvement over Mojo then. Just a little hesitant as I used a Mojo for desktop once and was a bit disappointed. Sound quality was noticeably worse via USB from my desktop computer compared to smartphones. Also had some hiss/clicks and pops on the Mojo (USB/computer) so I eventually sold it. Loved the sound from mobile sources though... Zero glitches or anything and a much cleaner sound.


----------



## Rob Watts

dmance said:


> @Rob Watts
> So appreciate you being back on-line in a big way with incredible contributions to chord product and technology knowledge.
> Regarding the Qutest chassis - which is described in the literature as being more heavy and robust to reduce vibrations and hence isolation of the circuit board.
> Is this market-speak? ...or does this isolation benefit, in any way, the Qutest sound quality.
> ...



Yes John did a great job on it - it really feels substantial. I would be surprised if it did not help SQ wise, but I haven't listened to the chassis yet - I have only just had the metalwork myself!


----------



## dmance

Rob Watts said:


> Yes John did a great job on it - it really feels substantial. I would be surprised if it did not help SQ wise, but I haven't listened to the chassis yet - I have only just had the metalwork myself!


Rob - I can understand how isolation and mass can help tube electronics, transports or turntables ...basically things that can move.  But circuit boards - especially ones like yours that are compact and fpga based - are all just about electrons interacting about in a solid substrate.  Just offer up your two cents worth of input into what is going on when isolation begets better SQ.
Dan


----------



## Rob Watts

The problem is the quartz oscillator, and some components, which are very slightly microphonic. But this would only make sense when driving speakers. And measurement wise, I have to turn up the gain on the APx555 test gear by 120 dB - but you can hear clicks when the PCB is struck. So overall microphony is absolutely minute compared to tubes - but it is still there. I have a mounting screw close to the quartz oscillator so it is directly coupled to the chassis.


----------



## Jimi Zine

x RELIC x said:


> It won’t matter audibly. DSD _over_ PCM (not _converted_ to PCM) was created as a way to fool the USB interface to allow DSD transmition without drivers because the USB protocol doesn’t recognize DSD (it does recognize PCM). When a DAC sees a DoP signal it discards the PCM marker and plays the original DSD data contained _unchanged from the original_.
> 
> Basically DoP was created as a way to get around USB drivers, but coaxial and optical can use it as well.
> 
> ...



Thanks, I realise this however the Mojo I have now, uses DoP, and is associated with audio drop outs when using DSD128 or 256, this isn't a processing power issue but to do with the Mojo itself and DoP. The Qutest uses Native DSD instead (including mac) so hopefully this issue won't repeat.

Regards


----------



## upec

Do we need to install driver for  Windows 10 or Windows 10 have native support for Qutest?


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that.



I know that some people drove headphones and speakers directly from the 2Qute (via the right cables, and in some cases a source with bit-perfect digital volume control) and loved the sound.

I also saw someone claim that the analog output stage of the Qutest is the same as the Hugo 2 because the output impedance is the same, implying that it could drive headphones just as well.

What are your thoughts on all this?

Could you describe the differences between the two in this regard?

For those who are going to drive headphones and speakers directly from the Qutest anyway, what would be your recommendations relating to that?


----------



## Swiftfalcon

Omg can’t keep up with their pace for new products  Love it


----------



## Rob Watts

Music Alchemist said:


> I know that some people drove headphones and speakers directly from the 2Qute (via the right cables, and in some cases a source with bit-perfect digital volume control) and loved the sound.
> 
> I also saw someone claim that the analog output stage of the Qutest is the same as the Hugo 2 because the output impedance is the same, implying that it could drive headphones just as well.
> 
> ...


Yes I too saw that... But 2 qute, although having a discrete op stage, is not powerful; it was never intended to drive any low impedance at all. Qutest op stage has been upgraded, but it's not the same as Hugo 2. The op impedance has not been measured, so any mention of it is an error. But I have increased the drive on the discrete op stage, and I have used the Mojo op stage. This has the benefit of being very small, but capable of delivering large currents. But let's be clear; qutest was designed as a DAC only! As an aside, the Mojo op stage is the same as Hugo 2 electronically, but differs with the packaging and power delivery of the op transistors.


----------



## 514077

upec said:


> Do we need to install driver for  Windows 10 or Windows 10 have native support for Qutest?


I'd expect you'd need the same drivers as Hugo 2, even down to whether it's creater's edition or the older one.


----------



## canthearyou

Hmmmmm.......I will have to give this one a listen very soon. I'm in the market for a sub $2000 DAC


----------



## Jimi Zine

I don't understand how it can use Native DSD transmission without a driver on a mac?
Surely either an ASIO driver is needed or the DSD is transmitted via DoP??


----------



## wazzupi

What is the US price ?will this be at canjam NYC ?


----------



## dcp10

Rob - will the Qutest remember its input settings after it has been turned off? I believe the Hugo 2 does, but the 2Qute defaulted to USB, which was really annoying for those of using the BNC input.

One other question: I wasn't clear from the specs whether the two BNC inputs on Qutest would allow me to plug in two digital sources and switch between them (e.g., CD-player or streamer), or whether they are designed for only one input. Thanks!


----------



## Rob Watts

dcp10 said:


> Rob - will the Qutest remember its input settings after it has been turned off? I believe the Hugo 2 does, but the 2Qute defaulted to USB, which was really annoying for those of using the BNC input.
> 
> One other question: I wasn't clear from the specs whether the two BNC inputs on Qutest would allow me to plug in two digital sources and switch between them (e.g., CD-player or streamer), or whether they are designed for only one input. Thanks!


Yes all configuration settings are remembered.
The BNC inputs are individually selected, and will automatically go into dual data mode.


----------



## AndrewOld

Anyone else a bit underwhelmed by Chord’s CES news? Disappointed even?


----------



## Music Alchemist

AndrewOld said:


> Anyone else a bit underwhelmed by Chord’s CES news? Disappointed even?



For those anticipating other things, I can understand that.

I for one am ecstatic about the Qutest. A DAC with better measured performance than all other DACs on the planet aside from the DAVE for just ~$1,600? Sign me up!

(I used to own the 2Qute and was looking forward to its successor for awhile as well.)


----------



## dcp10

Rob Watts said:


> Yes all configuration settings are remembered.
> The BNC inputs are individually selected, and will automatically go into dual data mode.



That's great news - many thanks Rob!

Now I just need to decide whether to go for the Qutest paired with my existing headphone amp (Lehmann Black Cube Linear), or hold out for a future Hugo TT with dual BNC inputs...


----------



## jayz (Jan 10, 2018)

AndrewOld said:


> Anyone else a bit underwhelmed by Chord’s CES news? Disappointed even?



Not me. Qutest is great news and very cutting edge. 

I'm happy to wait till silicon tech advances to the point when it may become possible to do a lower cost digital player with an integrated M scaler.

Meantime, some breathing space to iron out current tech and more experiments on future tech.


----------



## x RELIC x

Jimi Zine said:


> Thanks, I realise this however the Mojo I have now, uses DoP, and is associated with audio drop outs when using DSD128 or 256, this isn't a processing power issue but to do with the Mojo itself and DoP. The Qutest uses Native DSD instead (including mac) so hopefully this issue won't repeat.
> 
> Regards



I see where you’re coming from. 

Actually, the issue is OSX. DSD worked fine until Mavericks was released. With the DAVE there are dropouts with DSD so, unfortunately, I suspect that it will be the same with the Qutest. I personally doubt it has anything to do with the Mojo having issues with DoP itself.


----------



## wazzupi

Why is it 1600 when the euro to dollar ratio comes out to about 1450.


----------



## ray-dude

wazzupi said:


> Why is it 1600 when the euro to dollar ratio comes out to about 1450.



Europeans have the VAT to deal with, we have the Bluebird Tax to deal with


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 10, 2018)

wazzupi said:


> Why is it 1600 when the euro to dollar ratio comes out to about 1450.



Where did you get that number?

When I put £1,195 into Google, it says it's $1,614.33 USD. (At the moment.)

Oh, wait. I think you confused pound sterling with Euros.


----------



## dawktah2

AndrewOld said:


> Anyone else a bit underwhelmed by Chord’s CES news? Disappointed even?



NOPE!  This is EXACTLY what I wanted!


----------



## wazzupi

Umm


----------



## Music Alchemist

wazzupi said:


> Umm



As I explained, the listed 1,195 price is British pounds, not Euros. Converted directly, using Google, that would be about 1,351 Euros and a little over $1,600 USD.


----------



## Tumyum

Rob Watts said:


> If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that. And my listening tests with HP was that galvanic isolation was not required as the USB input sounded the same as optical. You only need galvanic isolation when driving amplifiers that are mains powered....



So the qutest isn't design for headphone in this case so what is it for, speakers? Also I kept hearing external amp degrade transparency of the dac, especially chord dac. the qutest can't do anything without an amp so in the end, I still need an amp, isn't it? Thank you to anyone for inputs.


----------



## wazzupi

Music Alchemist said:


> As I explained, the listed 1,195 price is British pounds, not Euros. Converted directly, using Google, that would be about 1,351 Euros and a little over $1,600 USD.


Excuse my European knowledge or the special British currency for that matter.


----------



## x RELIC x

Tumyum said:


> So the qutest isn't design for headphone in this case so what is it for, speakers? Also I kept hearing external amp degrade transparency of the dac, especially chord dac. the qutest can't do anything without an amp so in the end, I still need an amp, isn't it? Thank you to anyone for inputs.



Yes, that’s correct. See below...




Rob Watts said:


> If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that. And my listening tests with HP was that galvanic isolation was not required as the USB input sounded the same as optical. You only need galvanic isolation when driving amplifiers that are mains powered....


----------



## Rob Watts

Tumyum said:


> So the qutest isn't design for headphone in this case so what is it for, speakers? Also I kept hearing external amp degrade transparency of the dac, especially chord dac. the qutest can't do anything without an amp so in the end, I still need an amp, isn't it? Thank you to anyone for inputs.


It was indeed designed principally for speaker based systems.
But some like the coloration that external headphone amps create - and of course some headphones need added warmth - then Qutest would apply. But if it is transparency, coupled with refinement that one prefers, then I am afraid it's gotta be Hugo 2 or Dave...


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> It was indeed designed principally for speaker based systems.
> But some like the coloration that external headphone amps create - and of course some headphones need added warmth - then Qutest would apply. But if it is transparency, coupled with refinement that one prefers, then I am afraid it's gotta be Hugo 2 or Dave...



But don't most speaker amps also color the sound to a relatively significant extent?


----------



## 514077

AndrewOld said:


> Anyone else a bit underwhelmed by Chord’s CES news? Disappointed even?


No.  They'll give us news when they have some.


----------



## Rob Watts

Music Alchemist said:


> But don't most speaker amps also color the sound to a relatively significant extent?



Sure - to a greater or lesser extent. Hence my work on power pulse array - so then we shall all have our cakes and eat them...

So power pulse array allows the benefits of a single DAC amplifier, but instead of the 2W we get with Dave say, I can achieve hundreds of Watts with no loss at all in transparency and refinement - at least that is the intent....


----------



## ld100

Expensive little guy... Waiting for reviews!


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> Sure - to a greater or lesser extent. Hence my work on power pulse array - so then we shall all have our cakes and eat them...
> 
> So power pulse array allows the benefits of a single DAC amplifier, but instead of the 2W we get with Dave say, I can achieve hundreds of Watts with no loss at all in transparency and refinement - at least that is the intent....



We discussed the upcoming digital power amps before. Is this what you are referring to?

What you're saying now seems like a similar design to your "traditional" Chord DAC/amp designs, with the amplification in the DAC's analog output stage, except with a lot more power. I didn't realize this type of product was even in the works. I assumed the aforementioned amps would be amps only, without a DAC...but now that I think about it, being a DAC as well would explain why it's called a digital power amp.

But the thing is, if it's a DAC/amp, that means you couldn't use another Chord DAC with it, correct?

I might prefer this power pulse array since I do primarily use speakers and am also interested in driving certain headphones from speaker taps. Perhaps I'll wait for one of those instead of going for the Qutest, as long as it's not too much more expensive. If an external DAC cannot be used with it, I guess that means there will eventually be a flagship DAC/power amp that would be at (or above) the level of the DAVE. I'm assuming all of them would be able to be paired with DDCs like the Blu MkII and other future M-Scaler products.


----------



## bflat

Well we know one thing - being "Qutest" means it's the last iteration. Qute -> 2Qute -> Qutest -> ??


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> Sure - to a greater or lesser extent. Hence my work on power pulse array - so then we shall all have our cakes and eat them...
> 
> So power pulse array allows the benefits of a single DAC amplifier, but instead of the 2W we get with Dave say, I can achieve hundreds of Watts with no loss at all in transparency and refinement - at least that is the intent....



Although there will be coloration by the Woo WA33, the Qutest will do just fine with my 52 year old ears...


----------



## gad1

Wow.  Chord decides to sell direct.  Slashes
retail price by 40%.  Unit sales increase 10
fold.  They become even RICHER.  Then I
woke up.

Meanwhile, back to reality, if US distributors
price Qutest at $1,600, I'm all smiles, and
kinda shocked.


----------



## JWahl (Jan 10, 2018)

gad1 said:


> Wow.  Chord decides to sell direct.  Slashes
> retail price by 40%.  Unit sales increase 10
> fold.  They become even RICHER.  Then I
> woke up.
> ...



Judging by past pricing they likely will.  Keep in mind that the price in British pounds is likely including VAT.  VAT doesn't apply outside of Europe.  So the NA distributor keeps the 20% VAT as additional profit over MSRP less any shipping and customs charges.

And yes I'm sure Chord would make a killing selling the Hugo and below lines direct.  But I suspect they have no desire to invest in larger scale manufacturing necessary to meet additional demand.  This is likely why the Hugo 2 price increased after launch.  More demand than production capability.


----------



## ray-dude

Imagine having game changing products (the iPhone of this space) and having to sell them through a garage operation that doesn't answer emails or phone calls (haven't tried their fax number) at a crazy mark up.   

I have empathy for Chord, stuck with boutique distribution relationships when your poised to transition to (relatively) mass market products.  I sincerely hope they can segment their distribution at some point and make this amazing kit more accessible for a larger market.


----------



## JWahl

Rob Watts said:


> Sure - to a greater or lesser extent. Hence my work on power pulse array - so then we shall all have our cakes and eat them...
> 
> So power pulse array allows the benefits of a single DAC amplifier, but instead of the 2W we get with Dave say, I can achieve hundreds of Watts with no loss at all in transparency and refinement - at least that is the intent....



I think this is a similar concept behind NAD's digital direct amplifiers.  Of course their digital process is different than Chord's but same idea. 

Where I think that type of tech has the potential to shine is in active speakers with direct digital active cross overs.  

The Kef LS50 Wireless (I think) does something similar with active crossovers, dsp phase correction and such. 

I think a potential fantasy product could be a Chord/KEF collaborative LS50 wireless that uses Chord's tech for the digital stuff.  Could be a world beater.  But I digress.


----------



## ray-dude

bflat said:


> Well we know one thing - being "Qutest" means it's the last iteration. Qute -> 2Qute -> Qutest -> ??



-> Qute Plaid -> Qute Maximum Plaid


----------



## Jimi Zine

x RELIC x said:


> I see where you’re coming from.
> 
> Actually, the issue is OSX. DSD worked fine until Mavericks was released. With the DAVE there are dropouts with DSD so, unfortunately, I suspect that it will be the same with the Qutest. I personally doubt it has anything to do with the Mojo having issues with DoP itself.



I think you are right, and the fact Chord all out refuse to answer my questions both here and on facebook suggests the Qutest, like the Mojo, will use DoP for Mac DSD transmission, (rather than native transmission with an ASIO driver) meaning the DSD128/256 drop outs issue will remain so I will not be purchasing this or any other chord DAC.


----------



## howser

I have pre-ordered. Supposed to arrive sometime in February. Look forward to it. 

Im probably on the wrong forum but this one appears to be the most active. Can anyone confirm that I am able to use a bluesound node 2 RCA style coax out to the BNC coax in? or am I limited to the toslink connection?

Also appreciate Chords very own Rob Watts contributing to the forum. Great to see.


----------



## ray-dude

howser said:


> I have pre-ordered. Supposed to arrive sometime in February. Look forward to it.
> 
> Im probably on the wrong forum but this one appears to be the most active. Can anyone confirm that I am able to use a bluesound node 2 RCA style coax out to the BNC coax in? or am I limited to the toslink connection?
> 
> Also appreciate Chords very own Rob Watts contributing to the forum. Great to see.



These are what I used to interface the dual BNC out of the Blu2 to the dual coax input on the Hugo2.  It's just a standard stereo 3.5mm connector.  

iXCC Premium Gold-Plated 3.5mm Male to 2 RCA Female Stereo Audio Y Adapter Extension Cable (1ft)
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B019D04S4G

VCE 5-PACK Gold Plated BNC Female to RCA Phono Male Plug Adapter for CCTV
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B01N20F61M


I'd be very surprised if Qutest is different than the Hugo2


----------



## Zachik

Rob Watts said:


> If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that. And my listening tests with HP was that galvanic isolation was not required as the USB input sounded the same as optical. You only need galvanic isolation when driving amplifiers that are mains powered....


Rob - what if I want to use a desktop amp? Should I go for Hugo2 or Qutest? Does Qutest have ANY advantage (over Hugo2) other than cheaper price?


----------



## Rob Watts

JWahl said:


> I think this is a similar concept behind NAD's digital direct amplifiers.  Of course their digital process is different than Chord's but same idea.
> 
> Where I think that type of tech has the potential to shine is in active speakers with direct digital active cross overs.
> 
> ...


No it is very different to the NAD (actually Qualcomm's DDFA) technology; I know because I invented the technology behind DDFA. The key difference is that it is a non switching output.


----------



## Rob Watts

Jimi Zine said:


> I think you are right, and the fact Chord all out refuse to answer my questions both here and on facebook suggests the Qutest, like the Mojo, will use DoP for Mac DSD transmission, (rather than native transmission with an ASIO driver) meaning the DSD128/256 drop outs issue will remain so I will not be purchasing this or any other chord DAC.


I talked to Chord about this issue as I do not use a Mac; apparently ASIO is not supported on iOS. The issue of dropouts is the source sending faulty data; when the DAC sees a fault in the DoP format I used to have a full mute, thus making the dropout obvious. However, I have fine tuned the treatment of faulty data, so that now a hard mute is not created, and you may hear a tiny tick when the source transmits faulty data. In practice it is very hard to detect now.  But the treatment still means that DSD changes does not create clicks and pops. It took quite a lot of effort to mute when DSD changed, but to be tolerant of small errors in the data.


----------



## Jimi Zine

Rob Watts said:


> I talked to Chord about this issue as I do not use a Mac; apparently ASIO is not supported on iOS. The issue of dropouts is the source sending faulty data; when the DAC sees a fault in the DoP format I used to have a full mute, thus making the dropout obvious. However, I have fine tuned the treatment of faulty data, so that now a hard mute is not created, and you may hear a tiny tick when the source transmits faulty data. In practice it is very hard to detect now.  But the treatment still means that DSD changes does not create clicks and pops. It took quite a lot of effort to mute when DSD changed, but to be tolerant of small errors in the data.



Not very clear to be honest, 

a) I have used other DSD Dacs and they have not exhibited this drop outs problem, so surely it's the way the Mojo or Qutest works with OS X, rather than "the source sending faulty data", which implies it's somehow a problem with my mac or software or files, rather than the Chord Electronics equipment...

b) Still Chord refuses to answer the simple question - will the Qutest transmit DSD on a mac natively or via DoP (assuming the DSD will be native DSD either way, rather than a PCM conversion)?

c) Exasound have implemented ASIO drivers with OS X (if not iOS), so native DSD transmission on a mac is possible


----------



## bunkbail

Has BNC input but no coax input? Bummer


----------



## x RELIC x

bunkbail said:


> Has BNC input but no coax input? Bummer



BNC is coaxial, but with a BNC connector instead of an RCA connector. An RCA to BNC adaptor should be fine.


----------



## theaudiologist

what's the tap length of the mojo?


----------



## x RELIC x (Jan 11, 2018)

theaudiologist said:


> what's the tap length of the mojo?



Around the same as the Hugo2 and Qutest, but run at half speed for equivalent performance to Hugo1.

Sources:



Mojo ideas said:


> Actually it's about twice as many as Hugo but run at half the speed giving approximately the same number crunching power in terms of DSP ..... We have mentioned this before, but didn't want to put much focus on it as this is a small only part of the over design of Rob's overall topology





Mojo ideas said:


> it was always our intention to try to match the performance of Hugo To do this without using as much power as Hugo. Therefore Rob used more DSP cores but run differently to match the performance of Hugo but at far lower power demands. JF


----------



## Ra97oR

Eagerly awaiting to hear the Qutest on my setup. Hugo 2 performance at a lower price? Yes please!


----------



## AndrewOld

Does the Qutest remember the selected output voltage when you power it off and on?


----------



## theaudiologist

since 


x RELIC x said:


> Around the same as the Hugo2 and Qutest, but run at half speed for equivalent performance to Hugo1.
> 
> Sources:


it's slower does that mean the sound is worse? is there more latency?


----------



## x RELIC x

theaudiologist said:


> since
> 
> it's slower does that mean the sound is worse? is there more latency?



For latency I don’t think so, although that’s a question for Rob I would think. I like the sound of the Mojo but haven’t heard the Hugo1. The Mojo measures better but some users prefer the brighter sound of the Hugo. Both have the same power output and 4e Pulse Array. At the end of the day it’s not just the TAP length that influences the sound.

Might want to compare the Mojo and Hugo in their respective threads so this one stays on topic with the Qutest.


----------



## Currawong

Jimi Zine said:


> b) Still Chord refuses to answer the simple question - will the Qutest transmit DSD on a mac natively or via DoP (assuming the DSD will be native DSD either way, rather than a PCM conversion)?



The Qutest doesn't not transmit anything digital, it only receives it. Your question is really: Can a Mac send DSD? 

The answer is: There isn't any native DSD support in MacOS. You need software that can transmit DSD such as Audirvana Plus or Roon. Such software doesn't have to use DoP though, but can send DSD directly. DoP is used to fool hardware into treating DSD as if it were PCM, allowing easy transmission, even though the actual data is not PCM at all.


----------



## Music Alchemist

JWahl said:


> I think this is a similar concept behind NAD's digital direct amplifiers.  Of course their digital process is different than Chord's but same idea.
> 
> Where I think that type of tech has the potential to shine is in active speakers with direct digital active cross overs.
> 
> ...



The entire point of a power amp would be to drive passive speakers with it, not active ones.

If the upcoming power pulse array products are DACs with the power amp in the DAC's analog output stage (similar to prior Chord DAC/amps, but with a lot more power on tap...pun intended), that means they would not be able to be paired with any other DAC, including any by Chord. (Though I presume you would be able to connect DDCs like the Blu MkII to improve the sound.) This complicates matters. But since they are going to be more expensive and I don't know when they will be available, perhaps I will get a Qutest anyway in the meantime.

I took a brief look at the NAD products you mentioned. How do they work? Are they DACs with the amplification in the DAC's analog output stage? If so, this is the first time I'm hearing of a product like this that's not a Chord one. If not, why is it called direct digital?



AndrewOld said:


> Does the Qutest remember the selected output voltage when you power it off and on?



Yes:



Rob Watts said:


> To set the OP voltage you press the two buttons together when it's starting up - display in rainbow mode - then qutest will remain in that level. Pressing the buttons together will change the brightness of the display when in normal or working mode.


----------



## Rob Watts

AndrewOld said:


> Does the Qutest remember the selected output voltage when you power it off and on?


Sure


----------



## x RELIC x (Jan 11, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> that means they would not be able to be paired with any other DAC, including any by Chord.



Actually, the digital power amp has been discussed extensively in the DAVE thread intended to use the dual quad coaxial _output_, but I’m still fuzzy on the details regarding the DAVE’s role with the digital power amp.


----------



## Rob Watts

theaudiologist said:


> since
> 
> it's slower does that mean the sound is worse? is there more latency?



No. It simply uses the DSP cores at 104 MHz rather than at 208 MHz, in order to save power. Mojo design is all about saving power, in order to save battery life and because the unit is small, so can't dissipate the heat. You can design a WTA filter of a given tap length with a number of DSP cores at 104 MHz - if you then run the cores at 208 MHz you simply need half the number of cores - the filter performance is identical.


----------



## Music Alchemist

x RELIC x said:


> Actually, the digital power amp has been discussed extensively in the DAVE thread intended to use the dual coaxial _output_, but I’m still fuzzy on the details regarding the DAVE’s role with the digital power amp.



Could you summarize how it works as far as you know?

I don't understand why or how it would have a digital output if it's driving passive speakers.


----------



## x RELIC x (Jan 11, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> Could you summarize how it works as far as you know?
> 
> I don't understand why or how it would have a digital output if it's driving passive speakers.



No I can’t, that’s why I didn’t... lol. All I know is that the four (edited correction) digital coaxial outputs from DAVE was intended for the digital power amp. That’s all I know.


----------



## Music Alchemist

x RELIC x said:


> All I know is that the dual digital coaxial out was intended for the digital power amp.



Let's get things straight here. The DAVE only has digital inputs, not outputs, right? But if you are saying that the digital power amp has digital outputs (in addition to digital inputs, which I am assuming it will have so it can be paired with the Blu MkII) and could be paired with the DAVE, doesn't that mean it would be before it in the chain, with the DAVE at the end? How would it drive speakers then?


----------



## x RELIC x (Jan 11, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> Let's get things straight here. The DAVE only has digital inputs, not outputs, right? But if you are saying that the digital power amp has digital outputs (in addition to digital inputs, which I am assuming it will have so it can be paired with the Blu MkII) and could be paired with the DAVE, doesn't that mean it would be before it in the chain, with the DAVE at the end? How would it drive speakers then?



To be clear... DAVE has four digital coaxial BNC outputs. Look at the manual.

Edit: FOUR digital outputs.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 11, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> To be clear... DAVE has two digital coaxial BNC outputs. Look at the manual.



They should update their website, then, because they only list digital inputs and analog outputs in the features section.

Okay, so based on what you said, the chain could look like Blu MkII > DAVE > digital power amp. That makes sense now.

(I must have misinterpreted what Rob said about "a single DAC amplifier"...)

If that's true, then it would appear that it's not a DAC/power amp; just a power amp with digital input that uses a DAC with digital output.

...But wait... If that's true, doesn't that mean it cannot be used with the Qutest? (Which only has analog output.)

@Rob Watts
All this is very confusing. If you could clarify, it would be appreciated.


----------



## x RELIC x

Music Alchemist said:


> They should update their website, then, because they only list digital inputs and analog outputs in the features section.
> 
> Okay, so based on what you said, the chain could look like Blu MkII > DAVE > digital power amp. That makes sense now.



It’s likely not listed as the digital amp isn’t available yet so the feature is currently dead. 

You should bring this to the DAVE thread to keep the Qutest thread on track. I don’t think the Qutest can use the digital amps digital inputs.


----------



## Rob Watts

Music Alchemist said:


> They should update their website, then, because they only list digital inputs and analog outputs in the features section.
> 
> Okay, so based on what you said, the chain could look like Blu MkII > DAVE > digital power amp. That makes sense now.
> 
> ...



The only difference between Dave's DX output (that is the digital OP to connect to a DX power pulse array amp) and a regular 705/768 kHz signal, is the DX has volume control information embedded in the user data. So when Dave is used with a DX power amp then Dave becomes a DX pre-amp, as it controls the volume.
Qutest will accept the DX data, but will ignore the volume data, as Qutest does not have a volume control - it is a fixed OP DAC.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 11, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> The only difference between Dave's DX output (that is the digital OP to connect to a DX power pulse array amp) and a regular 705/768 kHz signal, is the DX has volume control information embedded in the user data. So when Dave is used with a DX power amp then Dave becomes a DX pre-amp, as it controls the volume.
> Qutest will accept the DX data, but will ignore the volume data, as Qutest does not have a volume control - it is a fixed OP DAC.



What I'm trying to figure out is how the Qutest would work with a DX power amp. (Or power pulse array / digital power amp...all these names. lol)

Normally, I would connect the DAC to a preamp, which would then be connected to a power amp. The Qutest only has digital inputs and analog outputs, so how would it connect to a DX power amp? The DAC comes before the amp, so I'm not sure what the Qutest's ability to accept DX data has to do with this. What would the chain look like?

What does DX stand for?


----------



## Rob Watts

Music Alchemist said:


> What I'm trying to figure out is how the Qutest would work with a DX power amp. (Or power pulse array / digital power amp...all these names. lol)
> 
> Normally, I would connect the DAC to a preamp, which would then be connected to a power amp. The Qutest only has digital inputs and analog outputs, so how would it connect to a DX power amp? The DAC comes before the amp, so I'm not sure what the Qutest's ability to accept DX data has to do with this. What would the chain look like?
> 
> What does DX stand for?


Qutest is not a DX pre-amp, it's just a fixed level DAC! It has no DX digital outputs, and won't decode the volume on a DX input.
DX is just a term...


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 11, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Qutest is not a DX pre-amp, it's just a fixed level DAC! It has no DX digital outputs, and won't decode the volume on a DX input.



So basically, the only Chord DACs that can work with any of the upcoming digital power amps are those that have digital outputs? Is the DAVE the only one?

I was under the impression before that the digital power amps could be used with more affordable DACs.


----------



## Rob Watts

Only Dave has DX outputs...


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> Only Dave has DX outputs...



Alright, thanks for clarifying.

So all that is a moot point for the Qutest, and I would have to use a conventional power amp with it.


----------



## Jimi Zine

Currawong said:


> The Qutest doesn't not transmit anything digital, it only receives it. Your question is really: Can a Mac send DSD?
> 
> The answer is: There isn't any native DSD support in MacOS. You need software that can transmit DSD such as Audirvana Plus or Roon. Such software doesn't have to use DoP though, but can send DSD directly. DoP is used to fool hardware into treating DSD as if it were PCM, allowing easy transmission, even though the actual data is not PCM at all.



I realise this thanks, and use Audirvana 3 and HQ Player which allow for Native DSD playback (on OS X), which I agree allows for both DoP & Native DSD transmission (Exasound for instance).
The problem, and many others confirm this, is that on a mac, using DoP with the Mojo (and other Chord Dacs), whereas DSD64 plays perfectly, DSD128 & 256 exhibit audio dropouts using this method. This is a significant drawback/flaw in the way the chord DACs receive DSD signals and is something Chord seems to want to ignore rather than focus on in any way.


Notes
a) I have used other DSD Dacs and they have not exhibited this audio drop out problem, so surely it's the way the Mojo or Qutest works with OS X, rather than "the source sending faulty data", which implies it's somehow a problem with my mac or software or files, rather than the Chord Electronics equipment...

b) Will the Qutest receive DSD on a mac natively or via DoP (assuming the DSD will be native DSD either way, rather than a PCM conversion)? 
ANSWER - Windows Natively with ASIO driver / Mac DoP it seems ??

c) Exasound have implemented ASIO drivers with OS X (if not iOS), so native DSD transmission from a mac is possible
ANSWER - SILENCE....


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 11, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> The only difference between Dave's DX output (that is the digital OP to connect to a DX power pulse array amp) and a regular 705/768 kHz signal, is the DX has volume control information embedded in the user data. So when Dave is used with a DX power amp then Dave becomes a DX pre-amp, as it controls the volume.
> Qutest will accept the DX data, but will ignore the volume data, as Qutest does not have a volume control - it is a fixed OP DAC.





Music Alchemist said:


> Alright, thanks for clarifying.
> 
> So all that is a moot point for the Qutest, and I would have to use a conventional power amp with it.



You still missed it, or I did.  See Rob's post above.  I assume the Qutest can accept the DX data and out put as analog, since it can't act as a preamp. but there would be some control with the 3 selections for different voltage (or would that be bypassed directly to op amp), in addition from the DX amp?   So you would either need to control the volume with software beforehand, like JRiver, or afterwards on a preamp in analog.  Confusing since I don't understand how the Qutest will have the power to output a stronger power signal.or allow pass thru??


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 11, 2018)

elviscaprice said:


> You still missed it, or I did.  See Rob's post above.  I assume the Qutest can accept the DX data and out put as analog bypassing the Qutest amp section, since it can't act as a preamp.   So you would either need to control the volume with software beforehand, like JRiver, or afterwards on a preamp in analog.



The way it was described, it seemed like the following to me:


The DX amps only have digital inputs, as well as analog outputs in the form of speaker taps...

...and the DAVE is the only Chord DAC that outputs DX data via its digital outputs...
...so the fact that the Qutest can accept DX data via its digital inputs has no relevance, especially since it cannot be connected to the DX amp.

@Rob Watts
If any of this is incorrect, let me know.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 11, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> The way it was described, it seemed like the following to me:
> 
> 
> The DX amps only have digital inputs, as well as analog outputs in the form of speaker taps...
> ...


That makes even less sense.  How can the digital amp output analog?  It isn't a DAC.  The output has to come from the DAC, even the DAVE.  No it's all about how to control the output level on the DAC.  What I don't understand is how this digital amp coincides with the DAC amp stage?  How does the DAC allow a greater powered signal than it's capable of producing.  Thus it allows pass thru??


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 11, 2018)

elviscaprice said:


> That makes even less sense.  How can the digital amp output analog?  It isn't a DAC.  The output has to come from the DAC, even the DAVE.  No it's all about how to control the output level on the DAC.  What I don't understand is how this digital amp coincides with the DAC amp stage?  How does the DAC allow a greater powered signal than it's capable of producing.  Thus it allows pass thru??



See, all this confusion would have been prevented if how the product works was explained in the first place...but it looks to me like all we have are hints at what the product could be.

As far as I know, speakers can only be driven by an analog signal, so it would have to be outputting analog at the end of the chain. And the digital power amp is _an amp that can output hundreds of watts_. He clearly stated that much. I'm not sure where the digital part comes in because it has not been clearly explained aside from the fact that it accepts a digital signal via the DAVE's digital outputs. The fact that it accepts a digital signal and presumably outputs an analog signal (as well as the quote below) is what made me assume at first that the digital power amp is also a DAC.



Rob Watts said:


> So power pulse array allows the benefits of a single DAC amplifier, but instead of the 2W we get with Dave say, I can achieve hundreds of Watts with no loss at all in transparency and refinement - at least that is the intent....



If Rob wants to put all this speculation to an end, he can simply (and clearly) explain how it works.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 11, 2018)

Has the specs and design of the supplied power supply been released? Will there be the same "void warranty" placed on the Qutest as with the 2Qute?  I am now wondering about power conditioning dedicated to the Qutest.  Have to see if anyone makes an AC to DC line conditioner.

IFI micro iUSB?


----------



## SteveUK

Music Alchemist said:


> See, all this confusion would have been prevented if how the product works was explained in the first place...but it looks to me like all we have are hints at what the product could be.
> 
> As far as I know, speakers can only be driven by an analog signal, so it would have to be outputting analog at the end of the chain. And the digital power amp is _an amp that can output hundreds of watts_. He clearly stated that much. I'm not sure where the digital part comes in because it has not been clearly explained aside from the fact that it accepts a digital signal via the DAVE's digital outputs. The fact that it accepts a digital signal and presumably outputs an analog signal is what made me assume at first that the digital power amp is also a DAC.
> 
> If Rob wants to put all this speculation to an end, he can simply (and clearly) explain how it works.



I'm sure Rob will be able to explain more clearly, but surely the comparison with a Mojo/Hugo is valid.... They both output in the analogue domain to drive headphones  (in fact it has been said that Mojo itself can drive sensitive passive loudspeakers directly, if not to great volumes) ....  If that were a greater voltage swing/current source then it could drive a speaker directly ....


----------



## elviscaprice

Yes, it would be nice to know how this future digital amp can play a roll with these DAC's.  Thus I am now in limbo and will hold off on any purchase without further explanation so as to be able to make an informed decision.  Looks like 2Qute stays for the time being.


----------



## Music Alchemist

elviscaprice said:


> Yes, it would be nice to know how this future digital amp can play a roll with these DAC's. Thus I am now in limbo and will hold off on any purchase without further explanation so as to be able to make an informed decision.



You 'n' me both! 

I'm hoping there will be a power amp that can be used with the Qutest and provide the most accurate sound possible (in the context of this DAC), at a relatively affordable price.

I would also like a preamp solution that would not color the sound. I used a passive preamp with the 2Qute and still use that preamp, and also used the Mojo as a DAC and digital preamp. When I compared the Mojo with and without the passive preamp, I did not hear a difference despite the passive preamp having an output impedance of up to 5,000 ohms. But I'd still want something with better specs just in case.

Side note: Chord DAC/amps are also digital preamps, and their website and other official promo material states as such. Since, in this context, digital preamp means the volume is adjusted digitally but it ultimately outputs analog, I wonder if "digital amp" means something similar.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 11, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> You 'n' me both!
> 
> I'm hoping there will be a power amp that can be used with the Qutest and provide the most accurate sound possible (in the context of this DAC), at a relatively affordable price.
> 
> ...



In my case I don't need much power with my highly efficient speakers.  In fact, 1 Watt with the Hugo 2 would be sufficient (right now the 2Qute at much less is fine), it's just that I don't like the design with the batteries and micro inputs.  I may just go that route anyways, regardless of digital amp design, which I'm sure would be over kill for my needs anyways.  Let alone the cost is going to be at DAVE levels, I suspect.  I am in no rush, enjoying the 2Qute.  I can't see upgrading to the Qutest, just for the Hugo 2 DAC guts and nothing else in upgrade, like a full digital sound stage and remote. The good thing is that the Qutest may bring about some better deals on the Hugo 2.  
Can only think of this verse, "Torn between two lovers, feeling like a fool"


----------



## theveterans

dawktah2 said:


> Has the specs and design of the supplied power supply been released? Will there be the same "void warranty" placed on the Qutest as with the 2Qute?  I am now wondering about power conditioning dedicated to the Qutest.  Have to see if anyone makes an AC to DC line conditioner.
> 
> IFI micro iUSB?


You might have to upgrade its default power supply to a higher iFi iPower as it's intended to just supply the little USB module inside the DAC housing, not the whole DAC unit itself.


----------



## Rob Watts

I am somewhat surprised by the confusion on the DX amps.
So if you want to connect to a conventional linear power amp, use Qutest.
For power levels of 1W/8 use Hugo 2.
2W, use Dave.
For greater powers, when we want to preserve transparency, then we need a DAC that has a more powerful OP stage - the DX amp that uses power pulse array. So these DAC's are pulse array, promising pulse array levels of distortion and noise, but 20W to many hundreds of Watts. The DX amp can be a dedicated power amp using a DX signal from Dave - so Dave becomes a digital only pre-amp, controlling the volume, and the DX amp is a power amp. Or they will be like Hugo 2 but with on board volume controls - equivalent to an integrated amp.

So the DX amps are just DAC's, exactly the same as existing pulse array DAC's - but with very high power OP stages, and a very clever power supply arrangement (don't ask!).
I hope that clarifies.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> I am somewhat surprised by the confusion on the DX amps.
> So if you want to connect to a conventional linear power amp, use Qutest.
> For power levels of 1W/8 use Hugo 2.
> 2W, use Dave.
> ...



Ah, so it's like I initially suspected from your comments—the DX amps _are_ also DACs! 

This all-in-one solution (including volume control) would make things so much more convenient.

As long as the most affordable one isn't too much more expensive than the Qutest, I'd rather just wait for that. (If you have estimated prices, feel free to share.)


----------



## Rob Watts

It's a complex technology, so it will be more expensive than Hugo 2 for example.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> It's a complex technology, so it will be more expensive than Hugo 2 for example.



As long as the cheapest one is under $4K, I'm in! (If higher, I'd have to think long and hard about it.)


----------



## 514077

Music Alchemist said:


> As long as the cheapest one is under $4K, I'm in! (If higher, I'd have to think long and hard about it.)


I just read Stereophile's JVS report on the Bluebird Chord room at CES.  Judging by the prices of the Chord preamps and poweramps, I can't help feeling that these DX products will be quite pricy.  My immense gut tells me we'll be looking into DAVE teritory for this technology.  Doesn't bother me, as I don't have speakers.  But, I'm not counting on owning one.


----------



## Rob Watts

Let's get the thread back onto Qutest now please!


----------



## 514077

Rob Watts said:


> Let's get the thread back onto Qutest now please!


Sorry, you're right.  Maybe I or someone else should start an appropriate thread.  Obviously, if I had a speaker rig, I'd jump on the Qutest, as I love my H2.


----------



## paul2qute

What's the trade in price for the Chord 2qute against the Chord qutest?Mine is less than a year old


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> Let's get the thread back onto Qutest now please!



I had a question about the included power supply and whether using a third party will void warranty like the 2Qute. Just from a quick search the IFI iPower would that be acceptable?


----------



## Rob Watts (Jan 11, 2018)

If the attached PSU meets USB specifications then you will not void the warranty - I just checked with Matt from Chord about this. I would add that it is designed to be power supply immune - as Hugo 2 is - so i don't expect any improvements from the PSU. But with USB it is easy to connect a portable  battery powered USB charger to it - and that for sure would represent the ultimate PSU.


----------



## jlbrach

so i understand....I currently have a Mcintosh 452 amp in my loudspeaker system...if i was to in theory use the qutest in such a system how would i control the volume ?A separate pre-amp along with my laptop as a source?


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> If the attached PSU meets USB specifications then you will not void the warranty - I just checked with Matt from Chord about this. I would add that it is designed to be power supply immune - as Hugo 2 is - so i don't expect any improvements from the PSU. But with USB it is easy to connect a portable  battery powered USB charger to it - and that for sure would represent the ultimate PSU.



Awesome thank you so much!


----------



## SoundeScapes

Having had, and enjoyed, the 2Qute for over 2 years now I'm tempted by the Qutest.
I really like what they have achieved here.
Input selector on the front. Selectable output voltage is a very nice feature.
Even though I like the Chordette design, Qutest is really good looking too.
The layout is clean and looks very smart imo.
And of course the updated Hugo 2 spec. I'm sure it is a fantastic DAC.

But, when thinking about what I have felt lacking with the 2Qute I'm not really sure.
The few negatives I have occasionally noticed is a slightly thin and maybe recessed sound stage.
In reviews and posts the TT is often said to have additional scale and authority.
Which is what I really want to add in my system. But with the updated spec 

So, when I close my eyes and make a wish what I see is a QTT (Qutest Table Top) or TTQ (Table Top Qute) which would 
be a TT2 without battery and HP amplification. In other words a 'DAC only' with super capacitors and the improved analogue output stage.
If that is what's making the difference(?). That's something I'd buy without thinking twice.
In fact I'll start saving up for it right away. Just in case..
If that will not happen though I'm pretty sure I will buy Qutest and be happy with that.
Great stuff coming from Chord. Really exciting.


----------



## Bulbsofpassion (Jan 11, 2018)

I was under the impression the super capacitors on the HugoTT were essentially to help out the battery on power supply duty, not to beef up the analogue output stage, is this not the case? I can kind of understand how this would help re driving difficult headphones, but if you're just feeding an amp (the likely use for a Qutest) then would super caps be of any use?


----------



## dcp10

SoundeScapes said:


> So, when I close my eyes and make a wish what I see is a QTT (Qutest Table Top) or TTQ (Table Top Qute) which would be a TT2 without battery and HP amplification. In other words a 'DAC only' with super capacitors and the improved analogue output stage.



That's exactly what I'm looking for - in my case I would like to be able to replace my separate headphone amp and just have one unit combining headphone amp + DAC. Yes, I could buy a Hugo 2, but I want the dual BNC input and more rack-friendly design of the TT - not to mention its more authoritative tone.

Rob - I'm sure you can't comment on future products, but many people would be interested in an updated Hugo TT...


----------



## IamMathew

Rob Watts said:


> Sure - to a greater or lesser extent. Hence my work on power pulse array - so then we shall all have our cakes and eat them...
> 
> So power pulse array allows the benefits of a single DAC amplifier, but instead of the 2W we get with Dave say, I can achieve hundreds of Watts with no loss at all in transparency and refinement - at least that is the intent....



Could you, please, rather think of..."Mojo" equivalent of power pulse array? For less than ten-thousands euros? Maybe under five thousand euro? Four thousand? Four thousand would be adequate! Then so much many more of us could have their cakes and eat them  Thanks


----------



## Rob Watts

Bulbsofpassion said:


> I was under the impression the super capacitors on the HugoTT were essentially to help out the battery on power supply duty, not to beef up the analogue output stage, is this not the case? I can kind of understand how this would help re driving difficult headphones, but if you're just feeding an amp (the likely use for a Qutest) then would super caps be of any use?



One benefit of super-caps is that it lowers the PSU impedance, and hence reduces the distortion crosstalk feed from the PSU. But this problem is eliminated with Hugo 2 and Qutest's PSU arrangement of regulating out from a boost voltage - so now the gain section is fed with clean power, eliminating the distortion that comes through the power rails. Of course, you have the benefit of huge current delivery from super caps - but that is not needed for a DAC.


----------



## maxh22

Rob Watts said:


> One benefit of super-caps is that it lowers the PSU impedance, and hence reduces the distortion crosstalk feed from the PSU. But this problem is eliminated with Hugo 2 and Qutest's PSU arrangement of regulating out from a boost voltage - so now the gain section is fed with clean power, eliminating the distortion that comes through the power rails. Of course, you have the benefit of huge current delivery from super caps - but that is not needed for a DAC.



Rob, so you're saying there wouldn't be any benefit if you put the Hugo 2 FPGA into the TT chassis using TT circuitry and super caps?

To my ears, the TT has a wider soundstage than either Hugo or Hugo 2 and a bigger more heftier sound overall.


----------



## Music Alchemist

jlbrach said:


> so i understand....I currently have a Mcintosh 452 amp in my loudspeaker system...if i was to in theory use the qutest in such a system how would i control the volume ?A separate pre-amp along with my laptop as a source?



Yes, you would normally connect the DAC to a preamp and connect that to your power amp.

There _are_ digital sources with bit-perfect volume control, so it's possible to get by without a preamp...but if I'm not mistaken, those are typically only available in pricey music servers and the like.

It's also possible to simply adjust the volume in your digital player from a basic computer, but that presents a number of potential issues, such as degradation of sound quality and the risk of inadvertently reaching dangerous SPL levels.

I use the $49 Schiit SYS passive preamp  (It's what I used with the 2Qute as well.). Its main advantage for me is that it does not color the sound in the way that some active electronics can. However, passive preamps have high output impedance, which can interfere with the sound when paired with certain amps. And this particular one has a lower quality potentiometer that makes a soft scratching sound sometimes when adjusting the volume.

There are obviously much nicer preamps out there (some cost tens of thousands), but the topic of preamp selection deserves its own thread.

It was really fun to use the Mojo as a digital preamp with speakers. If you haven't already, you might want to try the same with your Hugo 2 and DAVE, if only for the heck of it.


----------



## Rob Watts

No - you need the power delivery that supercaps offer for current hungry headphones.


----------



## maxh22

Rob Watts said:


> No - you need the power delivery that supercaps offer for current hungry headphones.



But what about with IEM's or when used as a dac in a  2 channel system? I hear the same differences.


----------



## Currawong

Jimi Zine said:


> I realise this thanks, and use Audirvana 3 and HQ Player which allow for Native DSD playback (on OS X), which I agree allows for both DoP & Native DSD transmission (Exasound for instance).
> The problem, and many others confirm this, is that on a mac, using DoP with the Mojo (and other Chord Dacs), whereas DSD64 plays perfectly, DSD128 & 256 exhibit audio dropouts using this method. This is a significant drawback/flaw in the way the chord DACs receive DSD signals and is something Chord seems to want to ignore rather than focus on in any way.
> 
> 
> ...



Could be a hardware issue. I haven't had this problem at all. Some Macs seemed to have USB 3 chipsets that don't play nice with some USB audio receivers. 

I had the impression that Chord DACs can receive both native DSD and DoP. I don't think it depends on drivers at all, but software on the computer. The software has to be able to read and send DSD files. If another brand requires a driver, then it means the USB receiver they are using doesn't follow the USB audio standard. I guess that native DSD transmission doesn't follow that anyway, but I'm not sure.



Music Alchemist said:


> The way it was described, it seemed like the following to me:



I might have mis-read, but the impression I got was that the DAVE can output the digital signal it creates before D/A conversion, or at least some kind of post-processed (post WTA filter and volume control) to the digital amp. What is being bypassed is the output stage of the DAVE, instead using the output stage of the digital amp which will convert the output to a level more suitable for driving speakers.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Currawong said:


> I might have mis-read, but the impression I got was that the DAVE can output the digital signal it creates before D/A conversion, or at least some kind of post-processed (post WTA filter and volume control) to the digital amp. What is being bypassed is the output stage of the DAVE, instead using the output stage of the digital amp which will convert the output to a level more suitable for driving speakers.



Yes, the confusion was cleared up in subsequent posts in this thread. Basically, if I'm reading some of the things Rob said later correctly, the digital power amps are all-in-one DAC/power amp/preamp units that can also accept a digital signal from the DAVE.


----------



## Jimi Zine (Jan 12, 2018)

*Currawong*


My mac does use USB3.0, I'm not sure of the cause but I know it was unacceptable playback using DSD128 & 256 using Mojo on a Mac OS X High Sierra.

With regard to Native and DoP transmission on a mac, here's what Exasound said four years ago (2014) (the only DAC company I know who integrate an ASIO driver to transmit native DSD on a mac)

"The Mac sound system doesn't have a built-in support for DSD-encoded audio. The audio industry has adopted an open-source standard called DSD over PCM (DoP). DoP relies on a workaround to disguise DSD as PCM data stream. Unfortunately this workaround causes 30 to 50 percent overhead. The DoP implementation of DSD 256 requires support for PCM at 705.6kHz and 768kHz. Such sampling rates are a real challenge for both computer CPU and USB audio interface.

The new completely redesigned exaSound Core Audio DoP256 driver overcomes these limitations...."


Rob Watts has said this,





to which I replied,





I received no further reply or clarification since this...


----------



## Currawong (Jan 12, 2018)

DSD256 has been working for me, on my Macs, with the Hugo 2 and Mojo. That is why I think it might be a problem with individual models, going by past experience with audio issues.

It could also indeed be system load. I had to double the memory on my Mac Mini (Late 2012, Core i7 2.3Ghz) to 16 GB before I could load a full 9-minute DSD256 track into memory and have it play all the way through. See the memory usage for Audirvana Plus just now during playback. Output is DoP 1.1 in settings.


----------



## Jimi Zine

Currawong said:


> DSD256 has been working for me, on my Macs, with the Hugo 2 and Mojo. That is why I think it might be a problem with individual models, going by past experience with audio issues.
> 
> It could also indeed be system load. I had to double the memory on my Mac Mini (Late 2012, Core i7 2.3Ghz) to 16 GB before I could load a full 9-minute DSD256 track into memory and have it play all the way through. See the memory usage for Audirvana Plus just now during playback. Output is DoP 1.1 in settings.



Maybe, I know it's not system load, as I have a powerful machine with 16gb memory, what are the memory/CPU app(s) you are using there?


----------



## Currawong

iStat Menus. It might help that I'm using an iUSB 3.0. If all else is good (ie: Your machine is dedicated to music playback as mine is and nothing else, software or hardware could interfere with transmission) then I'd strongly bet on a USB port issue.  What exact machine do you have with what exact specs?


----------



## Jimi Zine

Currawong said:


> iStat Menus. It might help that I'm using an iUSB 3.0. If all else is good (ie: Your machine is dedicated to music playback as mine is and nothing else, software or hardware could interfere with transmission) then I'd strongly bet on a USB port issue.  What exact machine do you have with what exact specs?


Macbook Pro 2015, 3.1Ghz intel core i7, 16gb memory,


----------



## paul2qute

I love watching films as well as music,I've got a naim nd5 xs Chord 2 qute  Arcam 850 going through Monitor apex 40 speakers and a rel sub,I should still hear the difference changing to the Chord qutest even though I don't have state of the art speakers shouldn't I???


----------



## jayz

Jimi Zine said:


> *Currawong*
> 
> 
> My mac does use USB3.0, I'm not sure of the cause but I know it was unacceptable playback using DSD128 & 256 using Mojo on a Mac OS X High Sierra.
> ...




My vote is we keep this thread limited to discussions on Qutest specific items - it is the official thread for Qutest after all. Looking forward to initial impressions, etc. Bristol Audio Show is coming up and hopefully, we will see increased activity of relevance to Qutest here soon.


----------



## jayz

Rob Watts said:


> But with USB it is easy to connect a portable  battery powered USB charger to it - and that for sure would represent the ultimate PSU.




Does that mean we can power it through a high capacity mobile power bank? I guess one of the fast-charge capable ones will be better. Not sure of how good such a power supply might be in terms of noise. As long as Qutest powers down automatically after a period of inactivity i.e. no signal then that use-case should work.


----------



## PANURUS

Can the Qutest usable with 2go one day? With an interface module ?
Or is a streamer, with the same design, in the pipe?


----------



## dmance (Jan 12, 2018)

I have a Qutest on pre-order ...which basically means i've told my dealer to call me when they come in.
Having auditioned the Hugo2 for several weeks, I know the sonic qualities of the technology.  I am on loudspeakers so the Qutest is the more appropriate desktop device for me.
My reasons for buying it are:

it can run on batteries (using commonplace and inexpensive +5V USB power pack).  This allows me to float my entire source chain off AC.  Laptop->USB conditioning->DAC without any AC mains noise or ground loops.  And I expect lots of forum input into what power pack sounds best.
USB Galvanic Isolation.  So, yes, thanks for this ...but I will also continue to use my Intona+Battery+Ferrites because my ears have heard how important it is to get rid of all RF/power/ground noise from the source.
32-bit samples from source is as good as a volume control.  I am 100% playing JRiver or Roon - which internally processes audio at 64-bits (volume, DSP, etc) and will downsample to 32-bits for Qutest.  No problem here ...and the ability to change output line levels lets me select the best sweet spot for my downstream electronics.
High resolution PCM768+DSD512.   I am intrigued by how close software up-sampling can be to M-Scaler.  My experiments with HQP+Hugo2 demonstrate that it's pretty darn good.  Yes, I love just listening to WTA filtered 44.1k music but there is so much forum dialog on upsampling and this lets me have some fun until Chord gets its M-Scaler product and pricing strategy in order.
Its just a DAC ...and just enough DAC for my needs.  I run single-ended and USB input.  More inputs or outputs are superfluous and money not well spent.  Also, given what I have learned about removing sources of RF/power/ground noise from the D/A portion of the DAC, i dont want any integrated streaming or bluetooth or WiFi in the same chassis.  I don't need convenience ...i need the best sound quality.
Its reasonably priced.
Dan


----------



## Rob Watts

jayz said:


> Does that mean we can power it through a high capacity mobile power bank? I guess one of the fast-charge capable ones will be better. Not sure of how good such a power supply might be in terms of noise. As long as Qutest powers down automatically after a period of inactivity i.e. no signal then that use-case should work.


Sure - that was one of the motivations for USB power, as battery supplies are inexpensive. Qutest consumes only 2.5W, so a 100W/H would last for 40 hours. If you can hear no change in connecting a battery, then that would prove that a "better" PSU to the one shipped is not possible. Battery operation provides absolutely the lowest possible RF and LF noise - they are ideal.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 12, 2018)

jayz said:


> As long as Qutest powers down automatically after a period of inactivity i.e. no signal then that use-case should work.





Rob Watts said:


> Sure - that was one of the motivations for USB power, as battery supplies are inexpensive.



The 2Qute, powered by a wall wart, only turned on/off when you connected/disconnected the power supply.

With the included power supply, does the Qutest shut down automatically? If so, when?



dmance said:


> 32-bit samples from source is as good as a volume control. I am 100% playing JRiver or Roon - which internally processes audio at 64-bits (volume, DSP, etc) and will downsample to 32-bits for Qutest. No problem here ...and the ability to change output line levels lets me select the best sweet spot for my downstream electronics.



I have many of the audiophile players out there (Bug Head Emperor / Infinity Blade, HQPlayer, JPLAY, etc.) but usually just use foobar2000.

I heard that foobar2000 has 32-bit internal processing that also applies to the volume control. Does that mean it could do bit-perfect volume control with the Qutest and without a preamp?

I still prefer having a preamp because there are too many variables otherwise...but I might want to try other solutions.



dmance said:


> I am intrigued by how close software up-sampling can be to M-Scaler. My experiments with HQP+Hugo2 demonstrate that it's pretty darn good.



Rob's position is that software upsampling (including HQPlayer) should not be used with Chord DACs because they already do much more advanced digital processing, and messing with things on the software end will just result in lower fidelity.

Now, if you like the sound, that's fine. But if your goal is superior technical performance, I'd ask Rob about the specifics on why it's not going to work that way.


----------



## dmance

@Music Alchemist 

Nobody but Mr. Watts knows what his secret sauce is.  The rumor is that M-Scaler WTA is a million-tap linear phase filter with carefully calculated coefficients developed over Rob's long tenure in digital audio.  its just math + time, right?  Well, as they say, the devil is in the details.
My limited experience in software up-sampling is running HQPlayer's XTR filters from 44.1 to 705.6k PCM and feeding them to Hugo2 - no problem on my lowly Yoga laptop.   Jussi Laako, the man behind HQPlayer, also has a secret sauce of hand-crafted filter optimization and he claims that XTR filters hundreds of thousands taps.  However, when I tried it, the Hugo2 still sounded better using WTA rather than the XTR filters. And this is just with Hugo2's 49k taps let alone M-Scaler's million taps.  I have not tried filtering to DSD512 or using closed-form and this is apparently much better sounding ..but I then I'll be investing in an expensive CPU+GPU system just to play music. 

So, long term I think that if all we want to do is just listen to our music in its best form we're better off just buying the damn M-Scaler - whatever the cost.   However, between now and then I can explore how close we can get - and maybe reach most of the way for far less.  Or not.
Dan


----------



## Music Alchemist

dmance said:


> Nobody but Mr. Watts knows what his secret sauce is. The rumor is that M-Scaler WTA is a million-tap linear phase filter with carefully calculated coefficients developed over Rob's long tenure in digital audio. its just math + time, right? Well, as they say, the devil is in the details.
> My limited experience in software up-sampling is running HQPlayer's XTR filters from 44.1 to 705.6k PCM and feeding them to Hugo2 - no problem on my lowly Yoga laptop. Jussi Laako, the man behind HQPlayer, also has a secret sauce of hand-crafted filter optimization and he claims that XTR filters hundreds of thousands taps. However, when I tried it, the Hugo2 still sounded better using WTA rather than the XTR filters. And this is just with Hugo2's 49k taps let alone M-Scaler's million taps. I have not tried filtering to DSD512 or using closed-form and this is apparently much better sounding ..but I then I'll be investing in an expensive CPU+GPU system just to play music.
> 
> So, long term I think that if all we want to do is just listen to our music in its best form we're better off just buying the damn M-Scaler - whatever the cost. However, between now and then I can explore how close we can get - and maybe reach most of the way for far less. Or not.



An important thing to note is that the taps are calculated differently. Basically, even the highest number of "HQPlayer taps" is still lower than the lowest number of "Chord taps" as far as their production DACs go, if I recall the explanations I read. And there's a lot more to it than just that. Again, you'd have to ask Rob for specifics or track down his posts about it in the past. But he was very clear that no matter how good the digital processing is on the software end, it would interfere with the digital processing of his DACs and result in lower fidelity. Simply thinking about it mathematically as adding two things to get a higher number isn't how it works at all.

I'm sure HQPlayer is technically fine for most other DACs, and I do use it from time to time. (I really hate the interface, though.) I generally use the most extreme settings, but it makes my laptop (which does have good specs: quad core i7 processor, 8 GB RAM, etc.) heat up and slow down to the point that I can't do much else on the computer at the same time. If I don't load a track into memory beforehand, it stutters like crazy. If I load web pages while music is playing, it can sometimes make the program crash and make alien noise until I restart it. Storing everything in virtual RAM drives helps dramatically, and I'd recommend that to make things easier.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 12, 2018)

Uh-oh...this link implies it will cost $1,795 in the US.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/chords-qutest-qute-dac

That's the same price the 2Qute originally sold for here before the price was lowered, whereas it was always only ~$1,300 USD in the UK. (I got a new 2Qute for $1,295 last year.)


----------



## jcn3

Music Alchemist said:


> Uh-oh...this link implies it will cost $1,795 in the US.
> 
> https://www.stereophile.com/content/chords-qutest-qute-dac
> 
> That's the same price the 2Qute originally sold for here before the price was lowered, whereas it was always only ~$1,300 USD in the UK. (I got a new 2Qute for $1,295 last year.)


i don't think it implies -- it's actually quite explicit. $1795 is the price.


----------



## Music Alchemist

jcn3 said:


> i don't think it implies -- it's actually quite explicit. $1795 is the price.



I don't make assumptions. Just because a link says that's the price doesn't mean that's what will ultimately happen. People can be wrong or change their minds. Things are constantly changing. The Hugo 2 was said to be ~$2,100 in the US (the preorder price) but then it was raised to $2,379 after launch. The UK price for the Qutest is ~$1,600. I'm hoping the US price will eventually be matched to that; otherwise it would feel unfair.


----------



## paul2qute

I'll be honest I'm buzzing about the Chord qutest,told the Mrs and she ain't sold on the idea,which just makes it more exciting because I'm gonna get it without her consent


----------



## BambiV

Seems to be no power switch?


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 12, 2018)

BambiV said:


> Seems to be no power switch?



No, same as 2qute, I plan on using mine on a switched outlet on power conditioner. I'm in a rural area our power bill is $35 even if I turn off main breaker...


----------



## GSP_

Just wanted to stop in and say that I’m more than excited for the Qutest DAC! I’ve been waiting on a successor to the 2qute for a long time, being primarily a loudspeaker listener. I had a chance to spend some time with the hugo 2 at RMAF 2017, and it was absolutely captivating. Looking forward to finally bringing some Chord magic into my home stereo this year.


----------



## Christer

With the new Quetest connected to a powerful and transparent headphone amp without the compromised output-stage of HUGO 2,
I would not be surprised if the end result with difficult to drive planars could at least in some respects rival or even beat DAVE/BLU without additional headphone amp into the equation with really dynamic non compressed symphonic material at demanding climaxes.
Clipping is not nice.
Cheers Christer


----------



## iAudio365

If 1795 is the price, wouldn’t it just make sense to buy a hugo 2 instead for the few extra hundred it costs? Being that it can do the exact sake thing anyway plus a whole lot more and has a built in amp anyway.

This is probably more tailored to people with a speaker setup that wanna dac up their amps in tv rooms etc.


----------



## Reactcore

I would use a 5v battery bay to eliminate any netvoltage adapter interferrence. And now one can choose a HP amp at choice and go portable. This thing is half the price of a Hugo2


----------



## Sunya

Rob, how are the 3 output voltage values of the Qutest achieved? Are these done digitally or in the analog stage?

Also, how many dBs under 0dBFS is the max output at the 3V setting?


----------



## jbarrentine (Jan 13, 2018)

paul2qute said:


> which just makes it more exciting because I'm gonna get it without her consent



probably the last thing you'll be getting for a while  

regarding price: moon audio wouldn't be raising the 2qute back up to 1500 if the qutest was going to be 1600. Expect to pay more.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 13, 2018)

iAudio365 said:


> If 1795 is the price, wouldn’t it just make sense to buy a hugo 2 instead for the few extra hundred it costs? Being that it can do the exact sake thing anyway plus a whole lot more and has a built in amp anyway.



$2,379 minus $1,795 equals $584. Those are significant savings. And it would be ~$784 cheaper if/when the US price is matched to the UK's.

General consensus is that the 2Qute sounds better than the Hugo. It makes sense that the Qutest could sound better than the Hugo 2 as well.

There are a few potential reasons for this, but the main one in my eyes is the external power supply vs an internal battery.

The Qutest also has galvanic isolation, dual BNC coax inputs, a more robust chassis, that Qute-style light on top, etc.

So it's not the exact same thing; it just has the same digital guts, so to speak.

Many who use speaker systems would want the Qutest rather than the Hugo 2.

Many who use headphones would want (or need, particularly in the case of electrostats) an external amp rather than driving them directly from the Hugo 2.

With the right cables, the Qutest (like the 2Qute) can still drive conventional headphones and some sensitive passive speakers directly; just with less power and no built-in volume control.



Reactcore said:


> This thing is half the price of a Hugo2



$2,379 divided by 2 is $1,189.50, so...no. It's roughly 3/4 the price.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

Hy there!

Need your help: could someone explain to me if i can give signal directly from the Qutest to Active Monitors? I own a Adam Sub 10 Mk2 Active https://www.adam-audio.com/en/subwoofer/sub10-mk2/ and Adam A7x https://www.adam-audio.com/en/ax-series/a7x/ and as a DAC a use a cheap 20$ Fiio http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/reviews/entry/fiio-d03k-taishan-digital-to-analog-converter

Im satisfied with this combo, but i figure the 1800$ Qutest will bring a stelar improvement.

I want to buy this.

Somebody said to me that i might need to use a preamp, but I dont know how to verify this topic and it seems strange that I have NO problems with 20$ DACs powering my Adam active monitors ... but i will experience problems paying a fortune on a expensive DAC.

Thanks!


----------



## Music Alchemist

adrian.clopotari said:


> could someone explain to me if i can give signal directly from the Qutest to Active Monitors?



Yes, of course you can, but it is generally recommended to have a preamp between them to control the volume more easily.

What do you currently use for volume control?


----------



## adrian.clopotari (Jan 13, 2018)

Thanks for the immediate response.

The TV remote or my smartphone.

90% of the times I listen music from youtube or playing movies.

The signal comes via an optical cable and enters my 20$ Fiio DAC. This DAC doesnt have a volume control, but a never needed one on the DAC.

Plus ... the Adams A7x have a volume control on the front https://www.adam-audio.com/en/ax-series/a7x/ but a rarely use it. 100% i use to control the volume by remote.

So ... the whole purpose of the preamp is to control the volume? Cause i imagined that i will get damage to my DAC or Monitors, burn them, loose waranty, something bad like this, if i dont match the output level of the DAC with the input level of the Active monitors.


----------



## Rob Watts

Sunya said:


> Rob, how are the 3 output voltage values of the Qutest achieved? Are these done digitally or in the analog stage?
> 
> Also, how many dBs under 0dBFS is the max output at the 3V setting?



It is done digitally, using Hugo 2's volume control. This ensures complete transparency, as the truncation is aggressively noise shaped, ensuring -400 dB accuracy.

The actual 0dBFS does not actually represent max modulation from the noise shaper as this will increase distortion levels. It's a bit complicated to explain!


----------



## Music Alchemist

adrian.clopotari said:


> So ... the whole purpose of the preamp is to control the volume? Cause i imagined that i will get damage to my DAC or Monitors, burn them, loose waranty, something bad like this, if i dont match the output level of the DAC with the input level of the Active monitors.



Pretty much. You can certainly skip the preamp and control the volume your way. Just be sure to start at a low volume and gradually increase it.

The Qutest has "a user-selectable output voltage available in 1, 2 and 3V RMS outputs for flexible connectivity with a wide range of partnering devices."

I used the 2Qute (which outputs 3V) with active monitors and a passive preamp just fine.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

So you used the preamp just to control the volume, otherwise it worked fine for you just the 2Qute with the Active Monitors? Thanks!

Whats the danger with not having a preamp and starting at a high volume? Can something get damaged?

Your recommendation is to start the Qutest at 1V Output and to go from there? Increasing the voltage will mean higher volume to the speakers?

So many new things for me today!


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 13, 2018)

adrian.clopotari said:


> So you used the preamp just to control the volume



Yes.



adrian.clopotari said:


> otherwise it worked fine for you just the 2Qute with the Active Monitors?



I never used it without the preamp.



adrian.clopotari said:


> Whats the danger with not having a preamp and starting at a high volume? Can something get damaged?



Yes: your ears. (And potentially the speakers too, but not likely.)

As a rule of thumb, no matter what equipment you are using, always start out at zero volume and gradually increase to your desired level, going no higher than that.

Note that with your setup there is the possibility of accidentally being too loud. A preamp has a volume knob that you can leave at a certain level, so at least it's set there, whereas all sorts of things can happen with digital devices that you use for volume control.



adrian.clopotari said:


> Your recommendation is to start the Qutest at 1V Output and to go from there?



That could work. But you should be fine with 3V. If it gets too loud too quickly, lower the voltage.



adrian.clopotari said:


> Increasing the voltage will mean higher volume to the speakers?



Yep.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

Thanks a lot! A will place my pre-order for the Qutest then!

Keep up the good work you are doing right here!


----------



## musicday

adrian.clopotari said:


> Thanks a lot! A will place my pre-order for the Qutest then!
> 
> Keep up the good work you are doing right here!


Salut și bine ai venit.
The Qutest will work great for your needs, or if you can reach further maybe get the stellar Hugo2.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

Bine te-am găsit!

I dont need the portability of the Hugo 2 or the headphone capability.

A never listen to headphones in the house.

I wanted to buy 2qute 3 months ago, but I informed myself on this forum that CES 2018 could bring a succesor so I waited. I only need a desktop DAC. Plus, I supose that Qutest is somehow a better desktop DAC than Hugo2, like the 2Qute was better than Hugo1.

I sure hope that Qutest will bring a great improvement to my 20$ DAC owned in the present.


----------



## bmfmarius

I use a hydra-z USB bridge > coax spdif to Mojo> rega elex-r amp
I'm curious what improvement I could get with the new qutest DAC connected via BNC coax?!! ( Hydra has this). I'm curious what improvement could the galvanically isolated USB can add.., as Mojo's performance is a little more bright, with more sibilance via direct USB.

One more thing @Rob Watts , why don't you add a HDMI input for i2s direct connection?!
I've read that demultiplexing all the clock's from the spdif  would degrade de original signal!

Thx


----------



## michaelvv

Look forward to read the first review of the Chord Qutest.


----------



## Rob Watts

bmfmarius said:


> I use a hydra-z USB bridge > coax spdif to Mojo> rega elex-r amp
> I'm curious what improvement I could get with the new qutest DAC connected via BNC coax?!! ( Hydra has this). I'm curious what improvement could the galvanically isolated USB can add.., as Mojo's performance is a little more bright, with more sibilance via direct USB.
> 
> One more thing @Rob Watts , why don't you add a HDMI input for i2s direct connection?!
> ...


Yes traditional SPDIF receivers are not good at recovering the SPDIF and creating a clock, as they rely on an analogue PLL - and the data itself modulates the clock, so you get signal correlated jitter which is extremely audible. But my SPDIF receiver is all digital, and relies upon the low jitter local clock, and does not create signal correlated jitter. The SPDIF receiver creates I2S data, with zero signal correlated jitter; plus a word clock, exactly as if it was transmitted via a real I2S connection.

But, the word clock - whether from a direct I2S or SPDIF, still will have source jitter. And this must be eliminated - and that is the job of my DPLL, which completely eliminates any source jitter. So there is absolutely no benefit in using I2S, so no need to go to the complexity of HDMI - the video noise would cause extra problems to worry about too.


----------



## SoundeScapes

michaelvv said:


> Look forward to read the first review of the Chord Qutest.



Me too. Yesterday I found a video on Youtube comparing H2 and TT, from "Pursuit Perfect System".
A blind test actually. His very personal conclusion in the follow up video was that H2 is the brain
and TT the body, referring to the more detail and resolution of the H2 and the better presentation of TT.
Personally I'm very interested in the presentation aspect and whether Qutest will differ in any way from H2 or not.


----------



## bmfmarius

@Rob Watts, thx for your reply. 
Ok, then I'm set as the bridge has audio grade clock's from Crystek 2xCCHD-950/957
http://audiobyte.net/products/hydra-z

I believe that the BNC connection is better / preferred ( impedance wise), to RCA / jack (Mojo's)


----------



## dcp10

I need some advice from the forum veterans please!

Most of my listening is with headphones (Sennheiser HD800), but occasionally with loudspeakers. I already have a capable headphone amp (Lehmann Black Cube Linear) and I'm considering either:

1. Buy Qutest and partner with the Lehmann amp (plus rest of my HiFi system - all Naim, BTW)

or

2. Wait for a rumoured Hugo TT2 and use this as both a DAC and a headphone amp.

Clearly option 1 is cheaper - and available very soon. The question is, which would give me better quality? 

(I guess this may be more a question about how good the Hugo TT/2 is as a headphone amp - but it's relevant to this topic because my need might be addressed by the Qutest)

 Ideally, I'd like to have a combined DAC/Headphone amp, simply because it is purer and reduces clutter - but I don't want to compromise on quality).

Many thanks!


----------



## Music Alchemist

dcp10 said:


> I need some advice from the forum veterans please!
> 
> Most of my listening is with headphones (Sennheiser HD800), but occasionally with loudspeakers. I already have a capable headphone amp (Lehmann Black Cube Linear) and I'm considering either:
> 
> ...



Chord is going to have better measured technical performance, but you may still prefer your amp.

The Hugo TT has the same maximum output power specs as the Hugo and Mojo. The Hugo 2 actually has more power, though this in itself wouldn't matter.

We can only speculate about a hypothetical Hugo TT 2.

What I can tell you is that I barely heard any difference between the Mojo and 430HAD when driving the HD 800 despite the latter costing $4,300.

The most realistic option for you, in my opinion, is the Hugo 2. You can also use it with an external amp and compare to direct drive.


----------



## Heartsmart

My setup right now is:

Chord mojo -> Mjölnir KGSShv -> Stax L-700.

Mojo is really fantastic and has served me well while looking for a new dac. But now it’s time for it to get out again as mobile device. Qutest is the one I have in mind to replace mojo in the Stax setup. The only downside I see with Qutest is the unbalanced RCA output. Because my amp has Balanced XLR input.

To my question:
Do you think that a very short quality RCA to XLR between Qutest and my amp would make a audible difference supposed to if Qutest would hav balanced XLR and using a balanced XLR to XLR cable?

All the best to you!


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 13, 2018)

Heartsmart said:


> Do you think that a very short quality RCA to XLR between Qutest and my amp would make a audible difference supposed to if Qutest would hav balanced XLR and using a balanced XLR to XLR cable?



Fellow STAX fan here! (Had four STAX systems in the past.)

Electrostatic amps are inherently balanced even when you use single-ended. Some electronics manufacturers skimp on the single-ended section, making the balanced sound better...but, as you probably know, Chord have some of the highest quality single-ended circuitry out there. It actually measures better than the balanced outputs, for their DACs that have both. But from what I've seen, those who compared the balanced and single-ended outputs of the DAVE (etc.) did not hear a difference after volume-matching. I'd be surprised if you were to use a Chord DAC with balanced outputs and discover that it sounded better than SE. (And would suspect it's due to the limitations of whatever you were connecting to.)

If you're looking for cheap but high quality RCA to XLR cables, I use these: https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=4777


----------



## maxh22

SoundeScapes said:


> Me too. Yesterday I found a video on Youtube comparing H2 and TT, from "Pursuit Perfect System".
> A blind test actually. His very personal conclusion in the follow up video was that H2 is the brain
> and TT the body, referring to the more detail and resolution of the H2 and the better presentation of TT.
> Personally I'm very interested in the presentation aspect and whether Qutest will differ in any way from H2 or not.



I watched all his Chord related videos and I have to agree with him. The TT has the body and H2 has the brains.

Since Qutest has yet to be released few have heard it so all we can do is speculate for now. But judging from the reviews and impressions of 2Qute and Hugo, they both have a similar sound signature that tends to be on the leaner side, in comparison to TT.

Hugo 2 also sounds a little leaner than TT so I reckon Qutest will too, but I really hope I am wrong!


----------



## Heartsmart

Music Alchemist said:


> Fellow STAX fan here! (Had four STAX systems in the past.)
> 
> Electrostatic amps are inherently balanced even when you use single-ended. Some electronics manufacturers skimp on the single-ended section, making the balanced sound better...but, as you probably know, Chord have some of the highest quality single-ended circuitry out there. It actually measures better than the balanced outputs, for their DACs that have both. But from what I've seen, those who compared the balanced and single-ended outputs of the DAVE (etc.) did not hear a difference after volume-matching. I'd be surprised if you were to use a Chord DAC with balanced outputs and discover that it sounded better than SE.
> 
> If you're looking for cheap but high quality RCA to XLR cables, I use these: https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=4777




Thanks for a very informative and promising answer! 

A little of topic, but I’m very happy with my Stax and KGSShv combination. I’m thankful every time I listen to the handmade amp. Build bu a very nice guy.

Your cable recmendation is funny because just a hour ago I looked at just that cable 
I think it’s hard to find a better sounding dac for the money.

Thanks again!


----------



## Music Alchemist




----------



## theveterans

maxh22 said:


> I watched all his Chord related videos and I have to agree with him. The TT has the body and H2 has the brains.
> 
> Since Qutest has yet to be released few have heard it so all we can do is speculate for now. But judging from the reviews and impressions of 2Qute and Hugo, they both have a similar sound signature that tends to be on the leaner side, in comparison to TT.
> 
> Hugo 2 also sounds a little leaner than TT so I reckon Qutest will too, but I really hope I am wrong!



Output stage from Qutest is different from Hugo 2 IIRC so I doubt Quest will sound like Hugo 2 + your preamp than can still cause coloration even when passive so the sound will be slightly different than Hugo 2 (I'm betting on the warmer side though).


----------



## Music Alchemist

theveterans said:


> your preamp than can still cause coloration even when passive



It "can"...but I'm glad I did not hear a difference with and without my Schiit SYS passive preamp when using the Mojo as a DAC & digital preamp with speakers.

It would be interesting to do these types of comparisons with the Qutest. (Digital volume control and RCA to speaker wire adapters for some.)


Qutest > passive preamp > power amp > speakers
Qutest > power amp > speakers
Qutest > passive preamp > speakers

Qutest > speakers


----------



## elgringo81

I will not buy a Chord product again. I have both Mojo and 2Qute and I have DSD dropout on 2 Roon endpoints and I have experienced the same with other linux flavors. On top of that, I would prefer a balanced DAC for my HDVA600 > HD800S. I have been pretty disappointed. I would like to test the new MF M6s DAC and see how that one is.


----------



## dcp10

Music Alchemist said:


> Chord is going to have better measured technical performance, but you may still prefer your amp.
> 
> The Hugo TT has the same maximum output power specs as the Hugo and Mojo. The Hugo 2 actually has more power, though this in itself wouldn't matter.
> 
> ...



Thanks for this.

The Hugo 2 had been my original plan, but:-

(a) I don't need the portability;
(b) I don't like the way it looks in a domestic setting - untidy, with the headphone jack sticking out of the back and a power socket sticking out of the front;
(c) Some people think the TT sounds better (than the Hugo) - and if it's that good, I can sell my Lehmann amp.
(d) I really like the idea of having two BNC connectors - that way I can connect my Naim CD player and the streamer.

I spent a week with the 2Qute last year and would have bought it - but for the fact that it forgot its settings each time it was powered down. The Qutest seems like a viable option, but perhaps a TT2 would be even better. I'm not clear whether those super capacitors in the TT improve the overall performance, or just the headphone-drivability.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 13, 2018)

elgringo81 said:


> I will not buy a Chord product again. I have both Mojo and 2Qute and I have DSD dropout on 2 Roon endpoints and I have experienced the same with other linux flavors. On top of that, I would prefer a balanced DAC for my HDVA600 > HD800S. I have been pretty disappointed. I would like to test the new MF M6s DAC and see how that one is.



Strong statement for only your 5th posting.  DSD dropouts are software driver related, especially with Linux OS.  Big reason why I use JRiver in Windows 10 optimized and Chords ASIO driver from a sCLK-EX server beginning and endpoint.  Never any issues with DSD dropouts here.  For balanced output you have to step up to the plate on Chord DAC's, TT or DAVE.  Good luck on other DAC's, see you soon back here looking for Chord option.


----------



## paul2qute

Lost my dad on the 7 th of December and he loved music like me.Mrs wants a holiday and I want the Chord qutest and we are suppose to be getting married this year, am I selfish for buying the Chord qutest or shall we go away and I be selfless???


----------



## elgringo81 (Jan 13, 2018)

Deleted by myself.


----------



## aldavey

Heartsmart said:


> Thanks for a very informative and promising answer!
> 
> A little of topic, but I’m very happy with my Stax and KGSShv combination. I’m thankful every time I listen to the handmade amp. Build bu a very nice guy.
> 
> ...


I Use a KGSShv carbon from that man in Iceland together with H2 and 009s, the best headphone sound available IMHO


----------



## musicday

paul2qute said:


> Lost my dad on the 7 th of December and he loved music like me.Mrs wants a holiday and I want the Chord qutest and we are suppose to be getting married this year, am I selfish for buying the Chord qutest or shall we go away and I be selfless???


Sorry to hear that. I hope that he lived many years and that he was a believer.
I would say buy the Quest and go on holiday later on when is more suitable.


----------



## michaelvv

elgringo81 said:


> I will not buy a Chord product again. I have both Mojo and 2Qute and I have DSD dropout on 2 Roon endpoints and I have experienced the same with other linux flavors. On top of that, I would prefer a balanced DAC for my HDVA600 > HD800S. I have been pretty disappointed. I would like to test the new MF M6s DAC and see how that one is.



I have tried 10+ different Linux kernels and distrubution, 4 different PC/Laptops and yes Chord has dropout on DSD (2Qute). This is not serious tested under Linux. So I can understand your frustration.


----------



## miketlse

paul2qute said:


> Lost my dad on the 7 th of December and he loved music like me.Mrs wants a holiday and I want the Chord qutest and we are suppose to be getting married this year, am I selfish for buying the Chord qutest or shall we go away and I be selfless???


Sorry to hear the news about your dad, but hopefully you both were able to enjoy plenty of music together.
I suggest take the holiday first, then in a few months time, there will be plenty of user feedback about how the Qutest performs in practice, and you can make an informed decision about whether you still want to order one.


----------



## Heartsmart

aldavey said:


> I Use a KGSShv carbon from that man in Iceland together with H2 and 009s, the best headphone sound available IMHO



I haven’t heard all the good stuff, but I guess that your gear comes as close as possible to my preferences. Have you tested other dacs to your Stax gear. I’m thinking on Dave and other high end dacs.

It seems that synergy is very important. That’s why it’s hard to buy anything without testing with the gear it will play with. There are a few dacs on my radar. Qutest is the one I’m hoping will sound best with my gear in the price range. But Mytek Brooklyn+ and NuPrime Dac-10 has also been recommended to me.


----------



## aldavey

Heartsmart said:


> I haven’t heard all the good stuff, but I guess that your gear comes as close as possible to my preferences. Have you tested other dacs to your Stax gear. I’m thinking on Dave and other high end dacs.
> 
> It seems that synergy is very important. That’s why it’s hard to buy anything without testing with the gear it will play with. There are a few dacs on my radar. Qutest is the one I’m hoping will sound best with my gear in the price range. But Mytek Brooklyn+ and NuPrime Dac-10 has also been recommended to me.


I agree with your remarks regarding synergy. My Chord path was Mojo, HD800. Then Mojo, Stax 009s and Stax amp 007tA. Then Mojo, 009s and Mjolnir KGSShv Carbon. That was the game changer for me, the Carbon, never heard such a huge change in resolution until adding the Hugo2. I've gone back to the HD800 direct from the Hugo2 as I've read a headphone amp degrades the H2 sound, but for me at least the 009s, Carbon and H2 is a killer combination.


----------



## dawktah2

paul2qute said:


> Lost my dad on the 7 th of December and he loved music like me.Mrs wants a holiday and I want the Chord qutest and we are suppose to be getting married this year, am I selfish for buying the Chord qutest or shall we go away and I be selfless???



I am so sorry to hear about your loss. It may be too late but two words: destination wedding. My second wedding/marriage/honeymoon was in the Virgin Islands. Paid 1/3 cost of first time wedding expenses.

Qutest money in the bank, problem solved.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 14, 2018)

Heartsmart said:


> I haven’t heard all the good stuff, but I guess that your gear comes as close as possible to my preferences. Have you tested other dacs to your Stax gear. I’m thinking on Dave and other high end dacs.
> 
> It seems that synergy is very important. That’s why it’s hard to buy anything without testing with the gear it will play with. There are a few dacs on my radar. Qutest is the one I’m hoping will sound best with my gear in the price range. But Mytek Brooklyn+ and NuPrime Dac-10 has also been recommended to me.



I've done a lot of research on DACs. (And owned a dozen, but the Chord 2Qute is the only one so far that cost more than $1,000.) The only ones I am still interested in (granted, this is based on online info, not auditions, aside from a few others I happened to hear) are the Chord DAVE, Blu MkII (a DDC that needs to be paired with a DAC, but basically in the same "category" as a DAC for this discussion), Qutest, and one of the upcoming DX amps (which will apparently be a DAC, power amp, and preamp all in one), as well as the Audio-gd R2R 7. My best friend recently bought the last one, so I should be able to spend time with it in the future to decide how I like it.

My priority is objective fidelity. If you get the best-measuring DAC you can at the price, that should bring the best out of your system, making synergy obsolete in my eyes. (Unless you are looking to color the sound to a great extent.)

(Side note: I am a strong proponent of parametric equalizers. Tonal balance is somewhat of a moot issue once you become proficient with those.)

What impresses me most about Chord is how they surpass all other DACs (including ones that cost up to six figures) in terms of measured performance.

Obviously, the DAVE has a better power supply, more pulse array elements, more advanced tap lengths and noise shaping, etc. than the more affordable Chord DACs. Some big, heavy R2R DACs in the same price range as those more affordable Chord DACs have rather overkill analog components, and some prefer their sound. There might be some things I'm missing in which the non-Chord DACs are still better in some areas, but if so, I can't tell what it is from measurements.

Since we're on this topic... I'm thinking it would make more sense to get the Blu MkII before the DAVE. People are going crazy over it, and it looks like it would result in better sound for a slightly lower price too. On the other hand, since they're meant to be paired to get the ultimate sound and cost so much (nearly $22K together), it would make most sense to simply wait until I could easily afford both. I do like the idea of starting with the Qutest and adding the Blu long before the DAVE...but five figures each for multiple products is nothing to sneeze at. I wouldn't even touch anything beyond the Qutest until after acquiring my endgame speakers, anyway.

Since it seems you are considering the DAVE, I would suggest thinking long and hard about the equipment you plan on using with it, and what to give priority to.

When I spent $1,295 on the 2Qute, I was only using $300 studio monitors. (I had five figures worth of headphones before, but transitioned to speakers last year and ended up vastly preferring them.) I'm using a $30 audio interface at the moment, but upgraded to floorstanding speakers and am getting far better sound than before. So although you can improve the sound of your system with a DAC, more often than not you will get a much more significant sonic improvement by upgrading your transducers.


----------



## paul2qute

Thanks for the replies and kind words of my dad's passing,appreciate it


----------



## dawktah2

New video posted interview with @RobWatts


----------



## paul2qute

I understand the 1v to 5v to the pre amp,less volts the better if I remember right when I put the Hugo through the NAIM nait 2 but I'm totally baffled by the usb 5 v ???


----------



## TLS1 (Jan 14, 2018)

IMO, the adjustable voltage output is a good idea but I wish they also had included a DIN connector..


----------



## Roeben

adrian.clopotari said:


> Bine te-am găsit!
> 
> I dont need the portability of the Hugo 2 or the headphone capability.
> 
> ...



Hi Adrian,

I have to disagree with you here. I did an A/B comparison between Hugo 1 and 2Qute, where the only changed part in the system was the DAC.   The 2Qute sounded warmer while the Hugo was much more natural and had very noticable increase in detail and depth.   For me the Hugo 1 was a clear winner.  I'm not sure if this is due to the Hugo having battery supply or the 2Qute 3V output, I can just share what I and a friend of mine noticed during audition.

That being said, I would like to hear if Rob from Chord can explain if this is expected based on Hugo1/2Qute design and if we can expect to have the same behavior between Hugo 2 and Cutest.

Thanks in advance


----------



## miketlse

I have listened to the video, but am not sure where the 5V gets mentioned.
Normally the 5V is mentioned in relation to the VBUS.



 

Chord dacs use the 5V on the VBUS pin to detect a usb input, even when there is no data being transmitted.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Roeben said:


> I have to disagree with you here. I did an A/B comparison between Hugo 1 and 2Qute, where the only changed part in the system was the DAC. The 2Qute sounded warmer while the Hugo was much more natural and had very noticable increase in detail and depth. For me the Hugo 1 was a clear winner. I'm not sure if this is due to the Hugo having battery supply or the 2Qute 3V output, I can just share what I and a friend of mine noticed during audition.
> 
> That being said, I would like to hear if Rob from Chord can explain if this is expected based on Hugo1/2Qute design and if we can expect to have the same behavior between Hugo 2 and Cutest.



It's interesting to read impressions like this. I only had the 2Qute and Mojo and have not heard the Hugo. But nearly all comparisons out there favor the 2Qute over the Hugo.


----------



## miketlse

Music Alchemist said:


> It's interesting to read impressions like this. I only had the 2Qute and Mojo and have not heard the Hugo. But nearly all comparisons out there favor the 2Qute over the Hugo.


Yes, this is all interesting.
The Qutest is the product that I wished chord had been selling 18 months ago, when I was investigating the 2Qute.


----------



## gad1

Rob Watts said:


> I talked to Chord about this issue as I do not use a Mac; apparently ASIO is not supported on iOS. The issue of dropouts is the source sending faulty data; when the DAC sees a fault in the DoP format I used to have a full mute, thus making the dropout obvious. However, I have fine tuned the treatment of faulty data, so that now a hard mute is not created, and you may hear a tiny tick when the source transmits faulty data. In practice it is very hard to detect now.  But the treatment still means that DSD changes does not create clicks and pops. It took quite a lot of effort to mute when DSD changed, but to be tolerant of small errors in the data.



Hello Rob or anyone else:  I'm still at least a little confused.  Should I assume that
Macs should be avoided for upsampling to dsd 256 or 512?  If so I would appreciate
some recommendations for a reasonably priced plug and play server that would
be Qutest compatible for upsampling/playback of at least dsd 256.  Assuming
this does not exist, and a Mac is a no go, what PC solution simple enough for a
computer semi illiterate would you recommend?

Thank You-


----------



## Roeben (Jan 14, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> It's interesting to read impressions like this. I only had the 2Qute and Mojo and have not heard the Hugo. But nearly all comparisons out there favor the 2Qute over the Hugo.



Interesting indeed... Aside me and my friend on that one audition, I also know someone who has had both the Hugo and 2Qute and he sold the 2Qute for the same reason. I'm new to head-fi and still reading up but I actually haven't seen someone stating the opposite.  Just for clarity: my A/B comparisons where made with the Hugo 1 and 2Qute as DAC in a hi-fi system with speakers only. 

I just watched the CES video on this page and it is good to hear from Rob that the Cutest has same FPGA code and DAC Components as the Hugo 2 and Galvanic isolation.   I was doubting between acquiring a second hand Hugo 1 or a new cutest and I'll think I'll go for the latter when it comes out.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Roeben said:


> I'm new to head-fi and still reading up but I actually haven't seen someone stating the opposite.



Out of the dozens of comparisons I've read, only a few preferred the Hugo over the 2Qute. Check out the 2Qute thread for lots of impressions.


----------



## jayz (Jan 14, 2018)

,


Roeben said:


> Hi Adrian,
> 
> I have to disagree with you here. I did an A/B comparison between Hugo 1 and 2Qute, where the only changed part in the system was the DAC.   The 2Qute sounded warmer while the Hugo was much more natural and had very noticable increase in detail and depth.



The issue is that the interpretation of what exactly "detail" means is different. In our mission to improve detail and resolution of our audio systems, we try to seek more of a certain aspect of the sound signature that we like. If you've been to any hifi show, just pick a few brochures of new models of speakers and I can guarantee a majority will claim the new version features more detail in the top or bottom compared to outgoing model. The trouble is, if you were to put all these different brands in one room and critically compare them against each other, it will be a very confusing picture as to which one has more details.

This is why it may help sometimes to explain why a certain component sounds more detailed. For example, someone might say a particular speaker has a very fast and detailed bottom-end because the many strands of harmonic resonances as they peak and decay, are easy to follow in a particular solo piano track featuring a steinway grand.

Even a brief explanation will help IMO.


----------



## dawktah2

Music Alchemist said:


> Out of the dozens of comparisons I've read, only a few preferred the Hugo over the 2Qute. Check out the 2Qute thread for lots of impressions.



I am purchasing the Qutest on reputation and impressions alone. I am not concerned about the loss of transparency that Mr. Watts talked about when I use my tube amp. I have briefly listened to the Mojo and the different is dramatic compared to the two DACs I have. I was warned against the 2Qute because of its 3v output so I am overjoyed the Qutest comes with variable output. I originally was looking for balanced output but realize that low noise isn't a concern of mine with my age.  I will need interconnect cable recommendations that are *not* custom made but are high quality. I will however get or make a custom power cable for the amp.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 14, 2018)

Roeben said:


> Interesting indeed... Aside me and my friend on that one audition, I also know someone who has had both the Hugo and 2Qute and he sold the 2Qute for the same reason. I'm new to head-fi and still reading up but I actually haven't seen someone stating the opposite.  Just for clarity: my A/B comparisons where made with the Hugo 1 and 2Qute as DAC in a hi-fi system with speakers only.



I have had both these DAC's, Hugo and 2Qute.  I think it really depends on implementation and system synergy.  With a good LPS, the 2Qute was easily the winner over the Hugo.  But I don't know if this will be the case with Hugo 2 and Qutest.  The Hugo 2, feature wise is a far bigger upgrade over Hugo than the Qutest over the 2Qute.
Regardless, the Qutest and Hugo 2 play to different feature needs and really are no competition to each other.  In fact, when the time is right, I may go with Hugo 2 over Qutest or remain with 2Qute until a new Chord DAC hits all my needs.


----------



## Currawong

gad1 said:


> Hello Rob or anyone else:  I'm still at least a little confused.  Should I assume that
> Macs should be avoided for upsampling to dsd 256 or 512?  If so I would appreciate
> some recommendations for a reasonably priced plug and play server that would
> be Qutest compatible for upsampling/playback of at least dsd 256.  Assuming
> ...



Personally, I wouldn't try and up-sample to DSD. It is not going to give you any benefits. Not to mention, once you get up to DSD256, you're sending over 2MB/sec to the DAC using USB Audio, which is significantly large. I can get this reliably working with the Hugo 2 and Audirvana Plus on a Mac with 16GB RAM and the memory limit set well, but not too far above the size largest track I'm going to play (currently a 9 minute DSD256 file which is about 1.5GB in size). Now also, I'm using good-quality USB cables, an iUSB 3.0 and the Mac does _nothing_ other than play music. But it doesn't surprise me that people are having issues. Asking a USB 2.0 interface, which is designed to share up to 127 devices and _assumes interrupts_ to provide real-time transmission at DSD256 and above is definitely pushing your luck.


----------



## Rob Watts

Up-sampling to DSD 256 from PCM will sound very much worse than just feeding the original PCM to Qutest - and this is for a number of reasons.


----------



## Music Alchemist

For those in the US:

http://blog.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac-need-know/

"*Want to Preorder the Chord Qutest? *

Sign up below and you’ll be the FIRST to know once pricing is finalized and its available for purchase."


----------



## miketlse (Jan 15, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> For those in the US:
> 
> http://blog.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac-need-know/
> 
> ...


They also have $200 of the Elear, which I remember you used to own.


----------



## Music Alchemist

miketlse said:


> They also have $200 of the Elear, which I remember you used to own;



Well, $200 off the original retail price...but it's available new on Amazon for as low as $740 now, so it's not like it's a deal you can't get elsewhere.


----------



## miketlse

Music Alchemist said:


> Well, $200 off the original retail price...but it's available new on Amazon for as low as $740 now, so it's not like it's a deal you can't get elsewhere.



Moon Audio recently did have some good deals on open box Focal headphones. They would have interested me, if I had lived in US.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 15, 2018)

A few thoughts on the CES video with Rob and John...

I noticed it was pronounced Qu_test_ (emphasis on second syllable and with an E sound instead of I) rather than how one would normally pronounce the word cutest. I wonder if this is how they intend it to be pronounced or if it comes down to personal choice. (Most will pronounce it like cutest anyway, of course.)

It was nice to see the product being handled.

I'm especially glad to know there will be more affordable M-Scalers in the future. (All of which should be Qutest-compatible.) So we can look forward to sound quality that is (presumably) equal or superior to the Blu MkII at a (hopefully significantly) lower price. I'd certainly prefer a standalone M-Scaler without having to pay for other features I wouldn't use.


----------



## AndrewH13 (Jan 15, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> A few thoughts on the CES video with Rob and John...
> 
> I noticed it was pronounced Qu_test_ (emphasis on second syllable and with an E sound instead of I) rather than how one would normally pronounce the word cutest. I wonder if this is how they intend it to be pronounced or if it comes down to personal choice. (Most will pronounce it like cutest anyway, of course.)
> 
> ...



Haha, I noticed that. I expected 'qutest kitten in the basket' pronounciation. Maybe John and Rob were forgetting Chord's Kent roots, and using their posh voices for the interview


----------



## miketlse

AndrewH13 said:


> Haha, I noticed that. I expected 'qutest kitten in the basket' pronounciation. Maybe John and Rob were forgetting Chord's Kent roots, and using their posh voices for the interview


Their audience for videos is global, so talking with british regional accents can confuse many potential customers around the globe.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 15, 2018)

AndrewH13 said:


> Haha, I noticed that. I expected 'qutest kitten in the basket' pronounciation. Maybe John and Rob were forgetting Chord's Kent roots, and using their posh voices for the interview





miketlse said:


> Their audience for videos is global, so talking with british regional accents can confuse many potential customers around the globe.



I await the Queen's review. 






(Sorry, couldn't resist making this. I hope it's found in good taste.)


----------



## miketlse

Music Alchemist said:


> I await the Queen's review.
> 
> 
> 
> (Sorry, couldn't resist making this. I hope it's found in good taste.)


No offence taken.
The difficulties with accents apply to many cultures/countries.
I find it much easier to understand parisien accents, compared to the accents of SW France.
Many french youngsters speak english with a US accent, because they partly learn the language from watching US films.


----------



## AndrewH13

Seeing that picture, I thought our John and Rob were being knighted for a mo!


----------



## Music Alchemist

AndrewH13 said:


> Seeing that picture, I thought our John and Rob were being knighted for a mo!



loool! Guess I did a convincing enough job. 

Can you imagine Chord being awarded a Royal Warrant? That would be...the qutest. 

They'd have to be convinced that high fidelity sound reproduction is a pressing issue of our time, though. 

(Notwithstanding the fact that typical items granted this status include such mundane things as food, drinks, and furniture.)


----------



## SoundeScapes (Jan 15, 2018)

I have been thinking about the different powering options for Qutest.
I have a Sbooster LPSU for the 2Qute and I think there was enough improvement to make it worthwhile
even though, if I remember correctly, the 2Qute was said to be immune to such PSU upgrades.
I know Rob said in this thread that further improvements have been made to the Qutest and that there really is no need to try
other PSU's. He also said that battery is the cleanest source and we can just compare the smps to a 'power bank'
and no difference will be heard. That might be true of course.
But, interested in this topic I did some googling and found the Mojo (!) Audio Faq site.
They manufacture and sell PSU's so keep that in mind 
Still interesting read though:
"Though better than the inexpensive switch-mode power supplies that come with many audio,
video, and computer products, battery performance can’t compare to the performance of an ultra-low noise linear power supply.
Batteries use a chemical reaction to generate DC power, and each chemical reaction from
each type of battery has its own audible noise signature.
This is why a specific type of battery, such as LiO4, sounds better than another type, such as SLA.
The noise level of a battery also changes significantly during different phases of the discharge and recharge cycle,
making batteries an inconsistent-sounding power source as well."
Here's the link to the FAQ: http://www.mojo-audio.com/power-supply-faqs/

Anyone in here who owns a 5V LPSU and will be performing battery vs LPSU vs SMPS tests on Qutest?
I don't own one myself so I can't try that during a home demo.
Very interested in the first impressions of the Qutest showing up in a few weeks.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 15, 2018)

SoundeScapes said:


> I have been thinking about the different powering options for Qutest.
> I have a Sbooster LPSU for the 2Qute and I think there was enough improvement to make it worthwhile
> even though, if I remember correctly, the 2Qute was said to be immune to such PSU upgrades.
> I know Rob said in this thread that further improvements have been made to the Qutest and that there really is no need to try
> ...



@RobWatts said:
"Sure - that was one of the motivations for USB power, as battery supplies are inexpensive. Qutest consumes only 2.5W, so a 100W/H would last for 40 hours. If you can hear no change in connecting a battery, then that would prove that a "better" PSU *to the one shipped* is not possible. Battery operation provides absolutely the lowest possible RF and LF noise - they are ideal."

I also remember something to the effect of the Qutest is engineered/designed to be "resistant/immune" to power source.  Has anyone seen the Qutest power supply, is it a battery based wall wart?


----------



## Music Alchemist

dawktah2 said:


> Has anyone seen the Qutest power supply, is it a battery based wall wart?



According to the product page, a "1.5m 5v 2a Switching Micro USB Power Supply" is included.

Also, "battery based wall wart" makes no sense to me. If it was mains-powered, it wouldn't be a battery, and vice versa.


----------



## JWahl

Music Alchemist said:


> According to the product page, a "1.5m 5v 2a Switching Micro USB Power Supply" is included.
> 
> Also, "battery based wall wart" makes no sense to me. If it was mains-powered, it wouldn't be a battery, and vice versa.



I think what he means is a wall wart charging an internal battery.  Or perhaps an external battery that is charged separately, which is a no to both. 

Though Rob mentioned that the 5v micro usb was chosen so people can optionally run off the grid with an external USB power bank if they choose to.  I like the flexibility, personally.


----------



## plsvn

question (to Rob Watts): is also a natural aluminum version planned for the future (I can wait ) or the Qutest will only be avalable in black?


----------



## jayz

It would be interesting to hear from those who currently have 2qute whether they think optical connection or coax sounds better for long runs ( 4m ) for source signal ( 16/44.1 - 24/96 only ). I expect Qutest to have a similar level of noise immunity but maybe the reworked case and internals help in this respect.

From a technical point of view, Rob has explained how his DPLL removes all jitter so this comes down to the effects of external noise getting in to the digital section and somehow affecting sound. I expect individual observations will be dependant on their setup and in particular, how noise-free, the connected source is but it is good to know what people think nevertheless.


----------



## Rob Watts

plsvn said:


> question (to Rob Watts): is also a natural aluminum version planned for the future (I can wait ) or the Qutest will only be avalable in black?


I am not the one to answer that - it's a Chord (John Franks) decision; but I understand that it will only be black. That said, it does look really cool in real life...


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 16, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> According to the product page, a "1.5m 5v 2a Switching Micro USB Power Supply" is included.
> 
> Also, "battery based wall wart" makes no sense to me. If it was mains-powered, it wouldn't be a battery, and vice versa.



Sorry I'm not an engineer but he said this: "*Battery operation* provides absolutely the lowest possible RF and LF noise - *they are ideal.*" I just thought Chord was going all in and making a battery based supply."  Since he said nothing would be better than the one supplied, I found this confusing and contradictory. Sorry...


----------



## Furch

Really sorry for Qutest didn't have XLR output... really want to try XLR version of Chord without battery issue, also I can't afford the Dave. 
One DAC will cost more than half of my system...


----------



## Triode User

Furch said:


> Really sorry for Qutest didn't have XLR output... really want to try XLR version of Chord without battery issue, also I can't afford the Dave.
> One DAC will cost more than half of my system...



Generally with Chord DACs, and certainly with the Dave, the RCA outputs are better than XLR for quality of signal so don't feel too hard done by. The XLR output on the Dave goes through an extra amplifier stage and so is bound to be not quite as good.


----------



## agedbest

Sorry, ....but about LPS
Rob Watts always declared his DAC not take advantage from an LPS
he declared this for ...2Qute....and now for Qutest
He told always,.... to every new product arrival

it will be true now?!?!?


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes - based on my listening tests - but others report differently! For sure, other amplifiers may be sensitive to Qutest PSU, that's why I recommend trying a USB battery to try for yourself - and if you can't hear a difference, then do not bother.


----------



## agedbest

Thanks


----------



## Music Alchemist

dawktah2 said:


> Sorry I'm not an engineer but he said this: "*Battery operation* provides absolutely the lowest possible RF and LF noise - *they are ideal.*" I just thought Chord was going all in and making a battery based supply."  Since he said nothing would be better than the one supplied, I found this confusing and contradictory. Sorry...



He was talking about using an aftermarket external battery power supply that can be recharged.

This has nothing to do with wall warts, including the included one.

If you (like most people) want to plug in and use it continually without worrying about charging, you need something that plugs into the wall.

As for the "nothing better" thing, I think he just meant as far as what is audible to him in his tests.



Furch said:


> Really sorry for Qutest didn't have XLR output... really want to try XLR version of Chord without battery issue, also I can't afford the Dave.
> One DAC will cost more than half of my system...



As mentioned above, you're not missing out on anything with single-ended when it comes to Chord.

(Unless what you're connecting to isn't designed well and sounds better with balanced input, or only has balanced input. In those cases, you can at least use single-ended to balanced cables like the ones discussed earlier.)

What battery issue are you talking about? The Qutest does not have an internal battery and comes with an external power supply that you plug into the wall.

At least you didn't do what I did in the past: buy a DAC that costs more than four times as much as the speakers.

I think there's no point bothering with high-end electronics until you've found headphones/speakers you're very happy with and want to focus on building a system around.


----------



## Furch

Triode User said:


> Generally with Chord DACs, and certainly with the Dave, the RCA outputs are better than XLR for quality of signal so don't feel too hard done by. The XLR output on the Dave goes through an extra amplifier stage and so is bound to be not quite as good.



Thank you for your advice, I just want to test with my ears via V281 that's said to have good XLR. Anyway now I use Dynaudio speaker more than headphone so I can tolerate my own need.




Music Alchemist said:


> As mentioned above, you're not missing out on anything with single-ended when it comes to Chord.
> 
> (Unless what you're connecting to isn't designed well and sounds better with balanced input, or only has balanced input. In those cases, you can at least use single-ended to balanced cables like the ones discussed earlier.)
> 
> ...



I once own Hugo till battery die (around 20 month use as desk top DAC) after that I buy 2Qute and use it till now.
I already encounter battery problem once via Hugo, I don't want same experience again with Hugo TT even I really want to test XLR of V281 so badly.

Sorry for my poor English & thank you for advice again.


----------



## dmance (Jan 16, 2018)

Regarding the 1V, 2V, 3V line level adjustment:



Rob Watts said:


> It is done digitally, using Hugo 2's volume control. This ensures complete transparency, as the truncation is aggressively noise shaped, ensuring -400 dB accuracy.



Rob - the published Qutest specs state 117dB SNR measured at 3V.  If my downstream amp full volume input sensitivity is 1.2V, suggesting all i need is 1V of output, does this make the SNR go up or down?  I guess I am asking:  Is there a sweet spot for the Qutest output line level setting?
Thanks
Dan


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 16, 2018)

Those in (or willing to travel to) the right areas should be able to audition the Qutest now. (At least at the first shop linked below.)

https://www.fanthorpes.co.uk/hi-fi-separates/dacs/chord-qutest-dac/
https://www.theaudiobarn.co.uk/product/chord-qutest-dac/
https://www.audiosanctuary.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-dac.html

It's ironic that the 2Qute price was lowered in the UK to £795 (~$1,100; at least with some dealers like this one) whereas it's reportedly going to be increased to ~$1,500 in the US.


----------



## Music Alchemist

More glamor shots.


----------



## MarkF786

I’m interested in getting a Qutest but I wonder if the issue with the first half second of tracks being muted exists, like on the Mojo. 

I haven’t yet found a way to fix it on a Mac.


----------



## dawktah2

Music Alchemist said:


> He was talking about using an aftermarket external battery power supply that can be recharged.
> 
> This has nothing to do with wall warts, including the included one.
> 
> ...



Thanks for clearing that up. I have the Woo Audio WA8 which has in internal battery which the charging circuit is completely separate from the DAC.  So this popped into my mind... I've never listened to my HA-2 to see if I hear any noise when it is plugged into the wall. I'd have to borrow an iPhone since android shares the micro USB with charging.

Thanks again


----------



## Music Alchemist

MarkF786 said:


> I’m interested in getting a Qutest but I wonder if the issue with the first half second of tracks being muted exists, like on the Mojo.
> 
> I haven’t yet found a way to fix it on a Mac.



Yes, unfortunately, Chord DACs have a delay due to their complex digital processing, and this can cut off the beginning of tracks on some systems.

What I did to fix it was use the affix silence component in foobar2000 to insert a second of silence before a track begins. There should be similar solutions on Mac.


----------



## MarkF786

Music Alchemist said:


> Yes, unfortunately, Chord DACs have a delay due to their complex digital processing, and this can cut off the beginning of tracks on some systems.
> 
> What I did to fix it was use the affix silence component in foobar2000 to insert a second of silence before a track begins. There should be similar solutions on Mac.



Thanks for the reply,  I never understood why Chord needs to implement such a drastic "fix", when so many other DACs don't.  With the Mojo, the only time the mute doesn't occur is if I let a whole album play track-to-track.  Otherwise:

- When I change albums it happens.
- When I change tracks on an album it happens.
- When I restart a track it happens.

One outcome is it's impossible to hear the first half second of any album.

I did see the hack of inserting a second of silence before each track, which some audio programs allow, but it locks the user into that program.  I bounce around between Audirvana, Tidal, Spotify, iTunes, and Amazon Music (all on a Mac) and as far as I can tell, none of them support this hack.  Has anyone else come up with a way to fix this problem on a Mac?

I was psyched to see the Qutest announced until I started listening to my Mojo again and was reminded of this problem.  I'm surprised more people don't find this an issue; I guess there are a lot of people using Foobar on Windows or something similar who can overcome it.

P.S.  Sorry for the venting; just wishing there was a fix.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 16, 2018)

MarkF786 said:


> I never understood why Chord needs to implement such a drastic "fix", when so many other DACs don't.



Because if they did not have the advanced digital processing, they would not stand out from other DACs and would not have such vastly superior technical performance.

Someone in another thread asked why their Chord DAC sounds better than others. I answered (quoted below; click to expand it) and was accused of "shilling Chord stuff". LOL! I mean, he's the one who wanted to know.



Music Alchemist said:


> Many things set Chord DACs apart, including:
> 
> 
> Timing accuracy thousands of times more precise than all other DACs
> ...



I'm sure there are other solutions I don't know about. I know some audiophiles use high-end network players and music servers with Chord DACs, and I suspect most of the music players they use with them do not have an affix silence feature.


----------



## MarkF786

Music Alchemist said:


> Because if they did not have the advanced digital processing, they would not stand out from other DACs and would not have such vastly superior technical performance.
> 
> Someone in another thread asked why their Chord DAC sounds better than others. I answered (quoted below; click to expand it) and was accused of "shilling Chord stuff". LOL! I mean, he's the one who wanted to know.



I definitely respect the quality of their DACs.  I'm also a fan of Schiit's multibit DACs, currently using a Bimby, but I thought the Qutest would be a good upgrade or sidegrade.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 16, 2018)

I would have gladly paid the Hugo 2 pricing for the Qutest to have the same amp with digital control/remote as Hugo 2.  Why can't Chord make a reasonable cost full featured desktop DAC (Not TT)?  I don't want no stinking batteries (after Hugo 1 experience).  They just don't have the same sound signature as a good LPS.  I don't want no silly micro inputs, can't use standard audiophile chords, have to build special ones. possible with worse impedance.   Now I buy neither.  Chord we need more options!


----------



## theveterans

MarkF786 said:


> I definitely respect the quality of their DACs.  I'm also a fan of Schiit's multibit DACs, currently using a Bimby, but I thought the Qutest would be a good upgrade or sidegrade.



I think Qutest would be a good upgrade over Bimby if transparency is a high in your DAC criteria.


----------



## Rob Watts

dmance said:


> Regarding the 1V, 2V, 3V line level adjustment:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The SNR is actually constant - the degradation is due to distortion, so the 3v figure is distortion and noise. All the settings have exactly the same actual noise, and almost the same distortion as a % of the fundamental OP voltage. The real issue is what happens on the pre-amp inputs, and this is why I have the adjusted outputs - so if the amp is rated at 1.2v then the 1v setting should turn out sounding the best.


----------



## VRDS

I own a 2Qute since ... maybe one and a half year, don´t remember exactly. I really, really like this DAC and I think there are some comments which don´t meet my experience or differes from what I think. So my 2 cents.

Can´t remember cutting a song or track.

Regarding 3 volt output of the 2Qute, maybe you should ask the maker of your amplifier what is the max. voltage the input could accept. I was worried before buying and asked also. My amplifier accepts up to 10V.

I tried a 12V battery at some point and at my system there was a real difference to the supplied switching powersupply. But for safety reasons I disconnected the 2Qute when charging the battery, for preventing failure due to overvoltage. After repowering you have to reselect correct input. Have no really good LPS for 12V so never tried. I´m back now at the original PS but use a filtering transformator now which powers that PS. Also it does a galvanic isolation. Overall this is not as good as the battery but works much better than just the factory PS, at my system.
But during my own testing I found powersupply for the source makes much more of a difference than for the 2Qute.

Regarding the question if optical or coax sounds better, for me coax sounds much better. Well, in my system.

I never used the USB input but doesn´t use the 2Qute also a galvanic isolation, which was not used at the Hugo 1?

Regarding USB-Power for the new DAC. No USB-battery (powerbank) is really linear voltage. There is no 5V battery, all of those powerbanks use an internal 3.7 volt battery and a switching DC/DC converting circuitry. During my testing for the source powersupply (which uses 5 volts as well) I found a quality powerbank much better sounding than any switching powersupply I tried, but a really good LPS was night and day. Never went back to the powerbank.

BTW the 2Qute also uses very little power, I measured around 2 watts only which is a fraction of some other DACs. So I always leave connected to the mains.

The new Qutest may look very interesting but actually just the 2nd BNC input is something I´m really missing at the 2Qute. For the filters I would be interested to know which one sounds same or similar to the 2Qute. For the 5V now used for power I can see there are more options around and easier for a manufacturer but I´m not really big fan of the micro USB connector. You can find a lot of mobiles not being charged anymore because of damaged connector.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 17, 2018)

VRDS said:


> But during my own testing I found powersupply for the source makes much more of a difference than for the 2Qute.



Could you elaborate on this?

For example, my laptop doesn't sound any different on battery power than plugged in with its stock power supply.



VRDS said:


> I never used the USB input but doesn´t use the 2Qute also a galvanic isolation, which was not used at the Hugo 1?



Yes, the 2Qute (and Qutest) has galvanic isolation.


----------



## paul2qute (Jan 17, 2018)

miketlse said:


> Moon Audio recently did have some good deals on open box Focal headphones. They would have interested me, if I had lived in US.


I had the focal utopia headphones,tried to convince myself they were special but sold them and never looked back,total waste of money in my opinion.Just having more detail just didn't do it for me,they were bass light which makes me think the best ain't always the best with my ears


----------



## VRDS

Music Alchemist said:


> Could you elaborate on this?
> 
> For example, my laptop doesn't sound any different on battery power than plugged in with its stock power supply.
> 
> .


I think a laptop will be very different from any other source so you can´t really compare. For the laptop there is just the choice between internal battery power and external power supply. You can´t modify the laptop because it´s too complex or use a LPS. I think also the internal DC/DC converts are not anything you could compare with a real clean voltage and those converters are in use independent if you use battery power or not.
Another problem is a laptop is not just playing music but the operating system does hundreds or even thousands of other operations at the same time. This means the load and therefore the current draw of a laptop or computer will change all the time within fractions of a second and causes spikes at the power supply voltage, a high frequency noise. The result is a voltage what is not clean at all and I think this will be much worser than found at a traditional or let´s say a hifi only source, if it´s well designed. Of course there might be differences between certain laptops, actually how good is the design of the overall power system.

Talking about my source actually I bought the 2Qute for replacing the internal DAC of my CD-Player. At some point I decided I also wanted using streaming radio and playing FLAC files. Well I didn´t found a streaming machine or whatever you call this, which was to my liking or to that of my wallet. So I went with a Pi2 based player, actually just for trying and playing with. Some guys will say a Pi2 is far from being perfect. Yes, that´s true but also it depends if you´re going the mainstream way or willing to change several things. In the beginning the Pi sounded really bad but after several improvements playing FLAC files sounded better than playing CDs through my much more expensive VRDS CD-player. At this point I also started playing with batteries and several power supplies for the 2Qute and the Pi and learned again what I experienced several years ago when modifying CD-Players for a friend. Source comes first, what goes wrong here can´t be betttered later.
I think I might go with a real good streamer, FLAC-player or whatever later, replacing the Pi. But for the moment I´m happy what a cheap Pi could do, when feed by a real good LPS and playing through coax.


----------



## Music Alchemist

VRDS said:


> Another problem is a laptop is not just playing music but the operating system does hundreds or even thousands of other operations at the same time.



That's why I use Windows Server 2016 Standard and AudiophileOptimizer.



VRDS said:


> So I went with a Pi2 based player, actually just for trying and playing with.



I tried a Raspberry Pi 2 Model B for a bit. It sounded slightly better than my laptop's normal operating system, but couldn't compare to the audiophile OS.



VRDS said:


> I think I might go with a real good streamer, FLAC-player or whatever later, replacing the Pi.



Here's the network player and music server I want.

https://sotm-usa.com/products/sms-200ultra-crux-audio-special-edition
https://www.smallgreencomputer.com/...ver/products/sonictransporter-i7-for-roon-dsp


----------



## VRDS

Ah OK. I read about that Optimizer at some point but the laptop solution is not what I want.

I use the same Pi2 but it doesn´t sound the same now as in the beginning. I tried several software and ended with Moode what sounds slightly better to me than others, changed power supply routing with bypassing the bad USB input circuitry, short solid core wiring, internal low ESR cap bank ... but the main key was the ultra-low noise LPS with Pi filtering. The difference to the next best solution was much larger than differences between power supply choices for the 2Qute.
Of course there are much better players but for the moment I´m very pleased how it sounds.
Out of interest how was your setup for the Pi?

Yes that player seems very interesting. But for telling the truth my final player should have a display. If music plays all day at the weekend I don´t like starting the tablet whenever I want just seeing the artist or song. At the time when I bought the 2Qute I had the chance listening to an Aurender. I liked the sound and it had a display. Well I´m oldschool.


----------



## Music Alchemist

So what systems are you guys planning on using the Qutest with?



VRDS said:


> Out of interest how was your setup for the Pi?



Nothing fancy. USB stick to store the files, basic player I don't remember the name of, used a browser on my laptop for the interface. (Accessed wirelessly via another module.) At that time I didn't have the 2Qute yet and was using a Mojo.


----------



## GSP_

Music Alchemist said:


> So what systems are you guys planning on using the Qutest with?



I’ll be using one in my main audio system. 7.2 channel setup, but when I use an outboard DAC like this - it is to listen to music in 2.1 via goldenear triton 2’s and a sealed velodyne sub. The Qutest will replace a Fostex HPA-8c which has been an excellent DAC, and will be moved into the workout room paired to some B&W CM5’s.


----------



## mraulino

Sorry if the question is stupid, but it’s just to make sure that I understood this well: if my amp’s input sensitivity is of 1.8v (as shown in the picture), it means I should select the 1v setting on the Qutest, right?



 

Thanks!


----------



## Music Alchemist

mraulino said:


> Sorry if the question is stupid, but it’s just to make sure that I understood this well: if my amp’s input sensitivity is of 1.8v (as shown in the picture), it means I should select the 1v setting on the Qutest, right?



1V is 1,000 mV. 180 mV is a small fraction of 1V, not 1.8V.


----------



## mraulino

Oh, so even at 1v the Qutest would be too much for my amp?


----------



## Music Alchemist

mraulino said:


> Oh, so even at 1v the Qutest would be too much for my amp?



I would consult Chord and your amp manufacturer on that.


----------



## georgehifi

ChordElectronics said:


> Output impedance: 0.025Ω THD: <0.0001% 1kHz 3v RMA 300Ω



What I'd like to know is, with an extraordinary low output impedance of .025ohm, why it can only handle down to 300ohm loading?

Cheers George


----------



## Rob Watts

The 0.025 ohm is incorrect - it actually has not been measured. The 300 ohm loading is because that represents the worst possible input impedance for an amp input - then some.


----------



## Triode User

mraulino said:


> Sorry if the question is stupid, but it’s just to make sure that I understood this well: if my amp’s input sensitivity is of 1.8v (as shown in the picture), it means I should select the 1v setting on the Qutest, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!



I must admit to having some difficulty understanding that stated input sensitivity for your amp. Normally I thought the stated input sensitivity was the input required to produce maximum stated output of the amplifier. In which case 0.18V input sensitivity seems very low for the line input to a pre amp as many CD players etc output 2V.

There seems little point asking Chord about your amp because they can only tell you about the output of their product ie 1V, 2V and 3V. Better to ask the amp supplier or manufacturer.

Can I ask though, have you used any other DAC or CD Player into the amp previously and if so did you have any issues? Look up the output of whatever you have connected previously and that should tell you what you need to know about whether the Chord will be a problem (which it shouldn't be but it is about understanding what the amp specs really mean).


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 18, 2018)

[QUOTE="Rob Watts, post: The 0.025 ohm is incorrect - it actually has not been measured.[/QUOTE]

Then how can one say that 300ohm is the minimum load impedance, If you don't know the output impedance.??

I say that specifying the "highest" output impedance (especially from 20hz to 20khz not just at 1khz) would have been close to the top of the list for source products, or for anything really, just to get any potential impedance mismatching out of the hifi chain equation.

Cheers George


----------



## Rob Watts

I did not say that 300 ohm is the minimum load impedance, just the one used for measurements. And the output impedance is so small as not to be possibly relevant.


----------



## georgehifi

Rob Watts said:


> And the output impedance is so small as not to be possibly relevant.



It's one of the very first measurements for the public to find out about, in Stereophiles barrage of very informative test bench measurements results. 
And is always commented on, on what is a suitable load impedance for it and what may not be, I think it a big over-site not to include it in your specs.

Cheers George


----------



## VRDS

Music Alchemist said:


> Nothing fancy. USB stick to store the files, basic player I don't remember the name of, used a browser on my laptop for the interface. (Accessed wirelessly via another module.) At that time I didn't have the 2Qute yet and was using a Mojo.


I think this way the Pi played just music but far away from what it´s possible. Additional to my post I use a SSD for storing files and keep away from wireless. Using the right network cable seems to make a difference too from what I heard and I use that too.
There are several manufacturers of expensive hifi gear which make also Pi based players, Bryston being one example. Of course there are much better players out there but when going away from a basic setup it will be also a different result.


----------



## VRDS (Jan 18, 2018)

deleted


----------



## Music Alchemist

On a related note, Schiit Audio amps and electrostatic amps have no maximum input voltage spec and are fine with whatever. (I confirmed this through research and interviews.)

I just took a look at the specs of the STAX SRM-353X amp just to use an example, and I noticed that it says "Rated input level: 100mV (at 100V output)"... It would appear that specs like this have nothing to do with the amp's maximum input voltage, so when you see them and don't see anything else, you will probably have to ask the amp manufacturer for that spec.


----------



## theveterans

Rob Watts said:


> The 0.025 ohm is incorrect - it actually has not been measured. The 300 ohm loading is because that represents the worst possible input impedance for an amp input - then some.





georgehifi said:


> Then how can one say that 300ohm is the minimum load impedance, If you don't know the output impedance.??
> 
> I say that specifying the "highest" output impedance (especially from 20hz to 20khz not just at 1khz) would have been close to the top of the list for source products, or for anything really, just to get any potential impedance mismatching out of the hifi chain equation.
> 
> Cheers George



Qutest is designed for connecting to a preamp or integrated amp. I am overly surprised with its headphone amp like output impedance since a normal DAC with a line out typically have their output in the hundreds of ohms. Anyways with those DACs the input that is expected is tens of thousands of ohms as expected of typical speaker power amps


----------



## JWahl

I have a general question for Rob Watts.  Anyone else feel free to direct me to another thread if this has been sufficiently explained elsewhere.  And if explanation would reveal too much proprietary information and can't be shared, I understand.  I just enjoy learning from various digital designers, as I am an early electrical engineering student. 

Regarding the "elements" in your pulse array dac, are the number of elements analogous to a "partial mutlibit" design?  I remember reading an interesting post by Thorsten Loesch (of AMR and iFi) about how many modern DAC chips are mutlibit up to about 6 or 7 bits, and then delta-sigma for the rest.

Do the elements in a pulse array function similarly or is it always a single bit-stream modulation?  Or is my general understanding way off?

I've read a lot of your past technical explanations of pulse array and found it interesting, but I was always a little confused about this part.

This might also explain why some of the pure mutlibit adherents I know that are not fans of most of Chord's DACs, still hold the Dave (20 elements) in high regard, despite the price. It might also explain why the 10e Hugo 2 seems to come closer on character to the Dave than past previous gen 4e designs.

As much as people here focus on filter "taps" I find the pulse array element part of Chord Dacs more interesting and worthy of further inquiry.


----------



## Music Alchemist

JWahl said:


> As much as people here focus on filter "taps" I find the pulse array element part of Chord Dacs more interesting and worthy of further inquiry.



There's at least one DAVE owner who does not like lower-end Chord DACs (though I don't think he has heard the Hugo 2) and thinks the power supply and pulse array elements are more important than the tap lengths and so on. I have also seen posts about how the FPGA / pulse array / etc. design of Chord DACs cannot be "properly implemented" without at least a certain number of pulse array elements. (Which is lacking in the Mojo, Hugo, Hugo TT, 2Qute, etc.)

It's hard to draw the line between objective and subjective when going from limited info like this, so I'm interested in Rob's take as well.


----------



## Triode User

JWahl said:


> I have a general question for Rob Watts.  Anyone else feel free to direct me to another thread if this has been sufficiently explained elsewhere.  And if explanation would reveal too much proprietary information and can't be shared, I understand.  I just enjoy learning from various digital designers, as I am an early electrical engineering student.
> 
> Regarding the "elements" in your pulse array dac, are the number of elements analogous to a "partial mutlibit" design?  I remember reading an interesting post by Thorsten Loesch (of AMR and iFi) about how many modern DAC chips are mutlibit up to about 6 or 7 bits, and then delta-sigma for the rest.
> 
> ...



You have asked in the Qutest thread. You might get more attention from Rob Watts in his own thread.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/


----------



## Whazzzup (Jan 18, 2018)

TT lacks nothing and in comparison to all dacs except Dave, is preferred imo. Even ch2 which has advantages the tt overall was more impactful to me.
I would be interested in tt2 with more pulse arrays and taps and upgraded fpga, but I sense it’s not in the cards from marketing perspective. Why blur the Hugo Dave trade off with something closer to Dave.... but maybe I’m cynical.


----------



## JWahl

Triode User said:


> You have asked in the Qutest thread. You might get more attention from Rob Watts in his own thread.
> 
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/



I figured it was relevant to the Qutest given the similar increase in elements to the Hugo 2.  But you're right, it's probably better posed there.  Thank you.


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 18, 2018)

VRDS said:


> I think input sensitivity means 0.18V is the lowest voltage the amplifier could accept for making music to the output, not the maximum.




Input sensitivity:
Is a figure that has *always* been how much voltage it takes at the input for the output to reach full level (just before clipping) 
Anyone stating this figure as something else, is bucking the system and just deliberately confusing everyone. 

Cheers George




theveterans said:


> Qutest is designed for connecting to a preamp or integrated amp. I am overly surprised with its headphone amp like output impedance since a normal DAC with a line out typically have their output in the hundreds of ohms. Anyways with those DACs the input that is expected is tens of thousands of ohms as expected of typical speaker power amps



The output impedance, Rob says they have never measured it (which is bizarre) , it's a big oversight in my opinion, as it part of the specs the public what to know.
And it should be measured not at just 1khz but from 20hz to 20khz as this tells the truth if it's capacitor coupled and if that cap is large enough for all loads it may see, as not to roll off the bass prematurely.

Cheers George


----------



## VRDS

I´m sorry for posting wrong information so deleted my post regarding input sensitivity.


----------



## Rob Watts

JWahl said:


> I figured it was relevant to the Qutest given the similar increase in elements to the Hugo 2.  But you're right, it's probably better posed there.  Thank you.


You can find my answer on my blog:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/page-43#post-13983849


----------



## agedbest

georgehifi said:


> The output impedance, Rob says they have never measured it (which is bizarre) , it's a big oversight in my opinion, as it part of the specs the public what to know.
> And it should be measured not at just 1khz but from 20hz to 20khz as this tells the truth if it's capacitor coupled and if that cap is large enough for all loads it may see, as not to roll off the bass prematurely.
> 
> Cheers George



also me too would like to know the value


----------



## agedbest

it would be simpler to evaluate the product ....
instead of reading reviews based on the esoteric listening of the reviewer on duty


----------



## agedbest

it would be simpler to evaluate the product ....
instead of reading reviews based on the esoteric listening of the reviewer on duty


----------



## Rob Watts

Ok I have just measured it - it is 0.042 ohms at the phono sockets, 1kHz. There is no DC coupling capacitor, (it has a digital DC servo) I got the identical 42 milli-ohms at 20Hz.


----------



## georgehifi

agedbest said:


> also me too would like to know the value



I've started to see a trend in the UK  and sometimes the US with mainly the "smaller" "cheaper: source components from manufacturers of not specifying output impedance, and sometimes the output voltage. It seems to be getting a little too regular to be an oversite of not including this specification.

Cheers George


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 19, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Ok I have just measured it - it is 0.042 ohms at the phono sockets, 1kHz. There is no DC coupling capacitor, (it has a digital DC servo) I got the identical 42 milli-ohms at 20Hz.



That's a great output impedance figure and should be able to drive the lowest impedance headphones direct to a comfortable level with the 2 or 3v output setting, hopefully it's consistent throughout the audio band if dc coupled.
This should be corrected in the pdf specs of the Qutest, as you stated it's incorrect at half this figure.

Cheers George


----------



## Triode User

georgehifi said:


> That's a great output impedance figure and should be able to drive the lowest impedance headphones direct to a comfortable level with the 2 or 3v output setting, hopefully it's consistent throughout the audio band if dc coupled.
> This should be corrected in the pdf specs of the Qutest, as you stated it's incorrect at half this figure.
> 
> Cheers George



Erm, it isn't a headphone outputting DAC. It is intended to output to a pre amp or integrated amp or perhaps direct to a power amp if the volume is controlled by software.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Triode User said:


> Erm, it isn't a headphone outputting DAC. It is intended to output to a pre amp or integrated amp or perhaps direct to a power amp if the volume is controlled by software.



Although this was the intention, it's still possible to drive headphones and even passive speakers directly from the Qutest with the right cables. Its power is limited, of course, so more sensitive transducers (or just lower SPL levels) would be required. Some actually preferred doing this with the 2Qute and liked it more than some headphone and speaker amps.


----------



## jayz

Triode User said:


> Erm, it isn't a headphone outputting DAC. It is intended to output to a pre amp or integrated amp or perhaps direct to a power amp if the volume is controlled by software.



Exactly. Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill. I'm surprised Chord bother to state the output impedance of line level output, most DACs don't.


----------



## georgehifi

jayz said:


> Exactly. Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill. I'm surprised Chord bother to state the output impedance of line level output, most DACs don't.



Most dacs do, and all should, as it's a very important spec to know what it's able to drive. 
That's why it's repeatedly stated in Stereophiles bench test measurements on how they will perform, and into what impedance load to be optimum, and what not. 

Cheers George


----------



## georgehifi

Triode User said:


> Erm, it isn't a headphone outputting DAC..



With this kind of output impedance, it certainly can be. Just no volume control. But you have 3 different output levels to choose from if you wanted to drive headphones.

Cheers George


----------



## Triode User

georgehifi said:


> With this kind of output impedance, it certainly can be. Just no volume control. But you have 3 different output levels to choose from if you wanted to drive headphones.
> 
> Cheers George



Yes but just because it outputs appropriate voltages does not mean that it can output a corresponding current. The devices it is intended to be connected to have a relatively high impedance compared to headphones and therefore there is no equivalent current available from the dac if a lower impedance driver is connected. The output impedance of the dac is surely not the limiting factor here. It is the impedance of the connected driver and the power output of the DAC which is after all not designed to output current. 

You can use a candle to try to boil a pan of water just don’t expect the candle maker to be surprised when you try to do it. And don’t expect him to provide specifications relating to the heat output of the candle.


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 19, 2018)

"If"!! it's truly is .042ohm output impedance from 20hz to 20khz and can deliver 3v, it will drive any headphones I know of. Probably better than many tube output headphone amps.
Here is an impedance/phase angle graph of my HD650's, this Qutest output will drive them without raising a sweat, "if" the specs are as I stated .042ohms from 20hz to 20khz at 3v. 

Cheers George


----------



## Triode User

georgehifi said:


> "If"!! it's truly is .042ohm output impedance from 20hz to 20khz and can deliver 3v, it will drive any headphones I know of. Probably better than many tube output headphone amps.
> 
> Cheers George



So, am I completely sidetracked by thinking that power output has any relevance? Is voltage and output impedance all the information one needs to tell if an amplifier can deliver the required current to a driver?

And why is it necessary to introduce a snide mocking tone to the reported measured output impedance?

Sorry, I bring you questions rather than answers.


----------



## georgehifi

Triode User said:


> Is voltage and output impedance all the information one needs to tell if an amplifier can deliver the required current to a driver?



Into speakers that can dip down to 2ohms with -phase angles as well that create even lower (EPDR) than 2ohms yes you need current, but not headphones, as you can see in the graph.





Triode User said:


> And why is it necessary to introduce a snide mocking tone to the reported measured output impedance?



I wasn't, just being to the point, as you were adamant in what you thought.

Cheers George


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 19, 2018)

georgehifi said:


> Into speakers that can dip down to 2ohms with -phase angles as well that create even lower (EPDR) than 2ohms yes you need current, but not headphones, as you can see in the graph.



Um... Power is voltage times current, and all headphones have power requirements. Read this: http://apexhifi.com/specs.html

The only headphones that don't use much current are electrostatics, and they use hundreds of volts from specialized amps.


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 19, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> Um...  all headphones have power requirements.



Were talking milliwatts in the HD650, the worst opamps ( I'm sure Chord didn't use these) can supply this which is more than some tubes head phone amps can output.  And then only "if" the output impedance of .042ohm can be maintained from 20hz to 20khz, as this was never given, only the 1khz figure.

Cheers George


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 19, 2018)

georgehifi said:


> Were talking milliwatts in the HD650, the worst opamps can supply this, and I'm sure Chord didn't use these.



You said headphones do not require current. That is the false claim I was addressing.

Here are the power requirements of the HD 650. (I calculated them before.)

Yes, they don't need a lot of power, but they still use current. That's the only point I was trying to make.






(These are just a rough guideline. Some music will use more power than listed above, especially when there is heavy bass.)

I have already covered that some people have driven headphones and speakers directly from the 2Qute. But the designer himself explained that it is limited in what it can do and has less power than the Hugo 2, for example.

Whether the Qutest can drive any given headphone to a certain SPL level depends on its power output specs, which have not been disclosed.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 19, 2018)

If I remember correctly.
V=I x R
P=V x I

I haven't seen current mentioned out of Qutest. Current is in "amps." Music Alchemist is correct Qutest needs and "amp"


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 19, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> You said headphones do not require current. That is the false claim I was addressing.
> /QUOTE]
> 
> That's taking things out of text, What I compared it to was speaker needing current.
> ...


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 19, 2018)

georgehifi said:


> Any decent opamp with low output impedance can drive headphones if the voltage is there for the level needed, and in this case it seems it is.



Some headphones, at least. Not harder to drive ones, though. I'll use the HIFIMAN HE6 as an example:







dawktah2 said:


> Music Alchemist is correct Qutest needs and "amp"



I never said that. In fact, I stated multiple times that people have driven headphones and speakers directly from the 2Qute (which outputs 3V), and some even preferred things that way. But at the least, it's going to be limited in terms of how loud you can get, depending on the impedance and sensitivity of the transducers.

All DACs (except the exotic MSB Select DAC, according to what MSB claim) have amplification of some sort, by the way.

If more specs for the Qutest were released (such as current and maximum output power at various input impedances), there would be less confusion.


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 20, 2018)

.dawktah2 said:[/QUOTE]I never said that. In fact, I stated multiple times that people have driven headphones and speakers directly from the 2Qute (which outputs 3V), and some even preferred things that way. But at the least, it's going to be limited in terms of how loud you can get, depending on the impedance and sensitivity of the transducers.

All DACs (except the exotic MSB Select DAC, according to what MSB claim) have amplification of some sort, by the way.

If more specs for the Qutest were released (such as current and maximum output power at various input impedances), there would be less confusion.[/QUOTE]


+1 on this.
You'll find most dac's (except maybe tube output ones) able to drive headphones, even if they are only 2v redbok standard output, but in this case we have 3v almost more than enough to send you deaf.

Cheers George


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> If more specs for the Qutest were released (such as current and maximum output power at various input impedances), there would be less confusion.



I’m sorry but that is just plain ridiculous. Qutest is a dac and not a headphone amp. I refer you back to my analogy of using a candle to try to heat a pan of water and then expecting the candle maker to publish heat output information regarding the candle. If you guys are suggesting using the Qutest for something that it is clearly not designed to do then you are out on your own and cannot expect Chord to publish data that might encourage you to do it.


----------



## georgehifi

Triode User said:


> Qutest is a dac and not a headphone amp. If you guys are suggesting using the Qutest for something that it is clearly not designed to do then you are out on your own .



Just because it doesn't have a headphone jack, doesn't mean it can't drive a pair of headphones to a certain level, maybe even better than some dedicated feeble tube headphone amps can.  

Cheers George


----------



## Triode User

georgehifi said:


> Just because it doesn't have a headphone jack, doesn't mean it can't drive a pair of headphones to a certain level, maybe even better than some dedicated feeble tube headphone amps can.
> 
> Cheers George



I am tiring of this. See it from a manufacturers perspective. The Qutest is a fixed output dac albeit with three different fixed outputs. Connecting a headphone to that requires somehow arranging variable volume control. If someone just plugs in headphones at 3v output and blows them or worse damages their hearing then there will be a lawsuit. Your persistence in somehow trying to engage Chord in the use of the Qutest to drive headphones direct is an agenda that you seem to want to pursue but you can see how you are unlikely to get Chord to participate in this. They are of course free to contradict me.


----------



## georgehifi (Jan 20, 2018)

You've got yourself all twisted up over this.
No ones saying it's a headphone dac,
This all stemmed from the fact that the output impedance is so low at .042ohms (maybe? from 20hz to 20khz that wasn't confirmed) and with 3v output, it's very capable of driving headphones to a decent level, even better than some tube headphone amps can.

Cheers George


----------



## miketlse

georgehifi said:


> You've got yourself all twisted up over this.
> No ones saying it's a headphone dac,
> This all stemmed from the fact that the output impedance is so low at .042ohms (maybe? from 20hz to 20khz that wasn't confirmed) and with 3v output, it's very capable of driving headphones to a decent level, even better than some tube headphone amps can.
> 
> Cheers George


Chord deliberately differentiated the 2Qute and Hugo, to fit into two different slots in their product line - the Hugo was a dac plus headphone amp (even if amp is rather a misnomer), and the 2Qute was the Hugo minus the battery and headphone amp, but with galvanic isolation on the usb input.
Chord have followed a similar policy with the Hugo2 and Qutest, so the initial Qutest design use cases, and product requirements will not have included the statement 'the product shall be able to direct drive headphones'.

You are always free to buy a Qutest, and discover whether using the Qutest outside its design space, by direct driving headphones is possible.
In the meantime you are building a reputation like another frequent poster on the chord threads, who recently was (humourously?) described as 'will endlessly debate the merits of eating soup with a fork'.

You expressed surprise that the Qutest output impedence is so low at 0.042 ohms, but that value will not have surprised long-term readers of the chord threads. The Mojo value is 0.075 ohms, and the Hugo 2 is 0.025 ohms.

You may enjoy this post from nearly two years ago.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 20, 2018)

Triode User said:


> I’m sorry but that is just plain ridiculous. Qutest is a dac and not a headphone amp. I refer you back to my analogy of using a candle to try to heat a pan of water and then expecting the candle maker to publish heat output information regarding the candle. If you guys are suggesting using the Qutest for something that it is clearly not designed to do then you are out on your own and cannot expect Chord to publish data that might encourage you to do it.





Triode User said:


> I am tiring of this. See it from a manufacturers perspective. The Qutest is a fixed output dac albeit with three different fixed outputs. Connecting a headphone to that requires somehow arranging variable volume control. If someone just plugs in headphones at 3v output and blows them or worse damages their hearing then there will be a lawsuit. Your persistence in somehow trying to engage Chord in the use of the Qutest to drive headphones direct is an agenda that you seem to want to pursue but you can see how you are unlikely to get Chord to participate in this. They are of course free to contradict me.





miketlse said:


> You are always free to buy a Qutest, and discover whether using the Qutest outside its design space, by direct driving headphones is possible.



Guys, I understand that Chord have their reasons for not discussing the ability of the Qutest and 2Qute to drive headphones and speakers directly (via the right cables) and releasing all the specs.

But the simple fact is, it can, and plenty of people have done so with good results, to the extent that some even preferred direct drive from the 2Qute over headphone and speaker amps in some cases. Obviously the volume would be limited for less sensitive transducers.

Anyone who has any idea what they're doing is going to take care of volume control in this situation. You can control the volume digitally, for example. foobar2000 has 32-bit processing. I'm not sure if that would qualify as bit-perfect volume control, but some say it does. There are other options, such as connecting to a preamp, but that would degrade the signal somewhat.

I transitioned from headphones to speakers last year and don't know when I will get back into headphones. I will certainly use external amps, but I would still like to experiment with direct drive to see if I get better sound, as some have discovered.


----------



## theveterans

Only reason the idea of getting a direct drive to a headphone is the unusually low output impedance, making it suitable to drive headphones with extremely good damping factor. Well if Chord desktop DACs have typical output resistance in the hundreds of ohms range like most other desktop DACs, probably no one would even think about using it as a headphone amp.


----------



## gad1 (Jan 20, 2018)

Does Chord hate America? Ok there is Trump, I get it,
but some of us need great audio to cope with the next
3 yrs.  Have a little compassion and encourage/
pressure your USA distributors to sell Qutest at a
price in the vicinity of Englands adjusted for the
exchange rate


----------



## JWahl (Jan 20, 2018)

gad1 said:


> Have a little compassion and encourage/
> pressure your USA distributors to sell Qutest at a
> price in the vicinity of Englands adjusted for the
> exchange rate



In all fairness, I'm fairly certain Chord has already had to pressure the NA distributor to drop prices when the exchange rates changed.  I would accept if they did a direct exchange rate from the British Pound cost, even though, to my knowledge, the British Pound cost includes the 20% VAT (If it doesn't, then someone please correct me).  That markup should be more than enough to cover any shipping and import duties incurred by the distributor.  Hopefully, the distributor doesn't try to get too greedy and mark it up even more, as the Stereophile article suggests.  Though that could be an assumed price on the part of Stereophile, based on the initial price of the 2Qute before.  If the price stays around $1600, I can accept that.


----------



## JWahl

*edit: duplicate post


----------



## dawktah2

Has there been a US availability date set? February is a little over a week away


----------



## Music Alchemist

For those who want hi-res images of the Qutest, I have seven in the spoiler below. (Right-click, open in a new tab, and download.)



Spoiler




      





JWahl said:


> In all fairness, I'm fairly certain Chord has already had to pressure the NA distributor to drop prices when the exchange rates changed.  I would accept if they did a direct exchange rate from the British Pound cost, even though, to my knowledge, the British Pound cost includes the 20% VAT (If it doesn't, then someone please correct me).  That markup should be more than enough to cover any shipping and import duties incurred by the distributor.  Hopefully, the distributor doesn't try to get too greedy and mark it up even more, as the Stereophile article suggests.  Though that could be an assumed price on the part of Stereophile, based on the initial price of the 2Qute before.  If the price stays around $1600, I can accept that.



There was discussion in other threads of the agreements Chord made with the North American distributor in the past that brought American prices closer to the UK ones. I'm not sure if anything has changed since then.

Considering that this level of measured performance has never been achieved in a DAC under $2,000 before (and, according to Chord, the Qutest and Hugo 2 also measure better than _every_ other DAC aside from the DAVE), it's a screaming bargain in my eyes whether it's $1,600 or $1,800.

The M-Scaler compatibility makes it even more exciting, especially with the prospect of more affordable standalone ones in the future.


----------



## gad1

Confusing pricing info on https://www.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac.html
Qutest $1,995, also "Price to be Determined", and "USA price NOT finalized",
great, could be higher or lower.  Brits are cool with 1,195GBP=$1,656.  Early
confusion to be expected.  Time will tell


----------



## audiomonkey777

Looking forward to seeing some reviews on this.


----------



## dawktah2

gad1 said:


> Confusing pricing info on https://www.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac.html
> Qutest $1,995, also "Price to be Determined", and "USA price NOT finalized",
> great, could be higher or lower.  Brits are cool with 1,195GBP=$1,656.  Early
> confusion to be expected.  Time will tell



That seems a bit of a gouge...


----------



## AndrewOld

It costs less than £25 to send a 1.5kg package from the U.K. to the USA via UPS.


----------



## jayz (Jan 21, 2018)

gad1 said:


> Does Chord hate America? Ok there is Trump, I get it,
> but some of us need great audio to cope with the next
> 3 yrs.  Have a little compassion and encourage/
> pressure your USA distributors to sell Qutest at a
> ...



At least Chord is selling to the international market within months of reveal.

Same story for goods imported to the UK from US, sometimes worse. We have to wait for months/years for some goods to be introduced here. And after import taxes, vat, shipping, we end up paying the same figure as the US folk but in GBP. If it costs 1000 USD, we get to pay £1000 when it reaches here - how unfair is that.

We desperately need a US UK trade pact.


----------



## omniweltall

Music Alchemist said:


> I for one am ecstatic about the Qutest. A DAC with better measured performance than all other DACs on the planet aside from the DAVE for just ~$1,600? Sign me up!


Interesting. Where is your source?


----------



## Music Alchemist

omniweltall said:


> Interesting. Where is your source?



@Rob Watts has published tons of measurements and technical explanations about how his DACs measure better than all others. (Sometimes dramatically so.) Check out his posts.


----------



## jayz

Almost two weeks since reveal but it seems like no one managed to get their hands on a Qutest?

Hard to imagine dealerships haven't got their demo samples or is everything on hold in the UK till Bristol Audio Show?


----------



## Music Alchemist

jayz said:


> Almost two weeks since reveal but it seems like no one managed to get their hands on a Qutest?
> 
> Hard to imagine dealerships haven't got their demo samples or is everything on hold in the UK till Bristol Audio Show?



I posted this awhile ago:



Music Alchemist said:


> Those in (or willing to travel to) the right areas should be able to audition the Qutest now. (At least at the first shop linked below.)
> 
> https://www.fanthorpes.co.uk/hi-fi-separates/dacs/chord-qutest-dac/
> https://www.theaudiobarn.co.uk/product/chord-qutest-dac/
> https://www.audiosanctuary.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-dac.html



From the first link:


> The Chord Qutest DAC is available for demonstration in our Hull store.


----------



## jayz

Thanks @Music Alchemist 

Any formal/informal reviews out yet ?


----------



## agedbest

now ready to buy
https://www.futureshop.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-standalone-digital-audio-converter?___SID=U


----------



## plsvn

instant purchase 

thanks


----------



## iFenixxZ

Hi guys.

What ampflier you will recommend pairing this bad boy for driving Fostex TH900/LCD-XC?


----------



## emrelights1973

Hugo2?


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 22, 2018)

agedbest said:


> now ready to buy
> https://www.futureshop.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-standalone-digital-audio-converter?___SID=U



Whoa. Under $1,400 USD! (When excluding VAT.) And it says worldwide express shipping.

I don't plan on buying the Qutest until I've upgraded my system again, though. The speakers I want next are $2,500...but I'm trying to decide whether it would be better to get back into high-end headphones and put speakers on the backburner. I'm in a house at the moment, but might end up moving to an apartment next, which would not be speaker-friendly.



emrelights1973 said:


> Hugo2?



I hope this is a joke, because, like all Chord DAC/amps, the Hugo 2's inputs are only digital.

Or maybe you were suggesting the Hugo 2 (by itself) instead.


----------



## x RELIC x (Jan 22, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> I hope this is a joke, because the Qutest's outputs are only analog and the Hugo 2's inputs are only digital.



Pretty sure it’s a reply that’s referencing these posts:



Rob Watts said:


> If you want to drive HP, get a Hugo 2. Any external amp will degrade transparency - you just can't escape that.





Rob Watts said:


> It was indeed designed principally for speaker based systems.


----------



## Music Alchemist

x RELIC x said:


> Pretty sure it’s a reply that’s referencing this post:



You replied before I edited my post. I mentioned that as a possibility.


----------



## x RELIC x

Music Alchemist said:


> You replied before I edited my post. I mentioned that as a possibility.


lol, and you replied while I edited my post, hahaha!


----------



## gad1

agedbest said:


> now ready to buy
> https://www.futureshop.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-standalone-digital-audio-converter?___SID=U



Would be interested to hear experiences of American residents
who have purchased from UK.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 22, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> lol, and you replied while I edited my post, hahaha!





Most high-end DACs are standalone DACs like the Qutest. I'd venture to guess that most headphone users buying it would have used an external amp anyway. (Rather than opting for something like the Hugo 2 as an all-in-one solution.) Plenty of people prefer external amps for whatever reason. (Whereas I thought the Mojo sounded roughly as good as the $4,300 430HAD.) I'm not sure whether most Qutest buyers will use it with speakers even if that was the company's intention. I wouldn't be surprised if more of them only used headphones, especially given Chord's strong presence on this headphone forum. And, of course, there are those (like myself) who would use it with both speakers and headphones. (And a few, again including myself, who would experiment with direct drive.)


----------



## emrelights1973

I dont see a point of Qutest if you are interested to buy a headphone amp at the same time, unless you go for a top end tube


----------



## Music Alchemist

emrelights1973 said:


> I dont see a point of Qutest if you are interested to buy a headphone amp at the same time, unless you go for a top end tube



As I mentioned, some prefer external amps over Chord DAC/amps by themselves. Some would need an external amp too, such as with electrostatic systems or very hard-to-drive headphones.


----------



## elviscaprice

emrelights1973 said:


> I dont see a point of Qutest if you are interested to buy a headphone amp at the same time, unless you go for a top end tube


  And I don't see the point in buying a Chord DAC if your not going to take advantage of the built in low impedance amp direct without coloring with some external amp/pre-amp, including top end tube.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 22, 2018)

emrelights1973 said:


> I dont see a point of Qutest if you are interested to buy a headphone amp at the same time, unless you go for a *top end tube*



That is my plan.

Is futureshop.co.uk an authorized dealer?


----------



## emrelights1973

elviscaprice said:


> And I don't see the point in buying a Chord DAC if your not going to take advantage of the built in low impedance amp direct without coloring with some external amp/pre-amp, including top end tube.



I meant go for hugo2 unless you want something exotic

There are many people using hugo as a dac for their naim nac552  so many that the naim forum is almost hugo forum!


----------



## Triode User

elviscaprice said:


> And I don't see the point in buying a Chord DAC if your not going to take advantage of the built in low impedance amp direct without coloring with some external amp/pre-amp, including top end tube.



Well we are all different. I might say I don’t see the point of buying a Chord DAC if you don’t team it with a powerful enough amplifier to let it unleash the full might and scale of large scale orchestral works. But I don’t say that because we all want something different out of our music and I accept that. I look with quizzical bemusement at people using low output DACs direct to speakers and would never do it myself but if you like it then that’s fine.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 22, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Well we are all different. I might say I don’t see the point of buying a Chord DAC if you don’t team it with a powerful enough amplifier to let it unleash the full might and scale of large scale orchestral works. But I don’t say that because we all want something different out of our music and I accept that. I look with quizzical bemusement at people using low output DACs direct to speakers and would never do it myself but if you like it then that’s fine.



Power of the amp has nothing to do with scale of sound from a large scale orchestral works, it is the matching of components that achieves that full sound intended.  That is an often thought fallacy from audiophiles.  More power, louder sound, better.


----------



## musicday

Elvis are you getting the Qutest to drive directly your Omega Juniors? I will be interested in knowing how this pair sounds.


----------



## elviscaprice (Jan 22, 2018)

musicday said:


> Elvis are you getting the Qutest to drive directly your Omega Juniors? I will be interested in knowing how this pair sounds.


      No, I will not.  The only upgrade for myself over the 2Qute is the increased resolution of the Hugo 2 DAC internals.  That is not enough of an upgrade in my mind (at the moment).  I would like an amp stage a little bigger, 1 Watt @ 8ohms would be nice like Hugo 2.  Plus a digital volume control with remote.  I'm not thrilled with the Qutest micro terminated supply either.

     That being said, I am quite pleased with the 2Qute, at the moment, driving my Super 8XRS Omegas.  I have no reason to doubt that the Qutest wouldn't also do the same.

      Hugo 2 is another option, but then I have to again cope with the non industry standard micro inputs, ugggghhh.  Let alone I'm not a fan of battery power signature.

     So I do nothing, till Chord/Rob Watts brilliant resolving DAC technology fulfill my feature/design needs.  Let's just hope that the new TT will be reasonable cost without the battery design.  I'm not going to pay twice the Hugo 2 cost for balanced outputs that I don't need.  I can't win it seems.


----------



## JWahl (Jan 22, 2018)

elviscaprice said:


> And I don't see the point in buying a Chord DAC if your not going to take advantage of the built in low impedance amp direct without coloring with some external amp/pre-amp, including top end tube.



Different strokes for different folks.

I can appreciate the strengths of chord DACs, but for my tastes, I find the analog stages to be lacking.  This isn't unique to Chord of course, many ultra low distortion amps are often perceived as sterile.  Chord DAC/Amps like the Mojo do still manage to avoid sounding sterile considering how well they measure.  That's a feat on it's own.  But I still find good external amplification to be more dynamically impactful and spacious. 

My theory is that the ultra low distortion analog stages reveal flaws in the recording equipment and ADC process.   I think that allowing specific spectra of harmonic distortion, while still keeping it low, may help to simulate or at least cover up these flaws psycho-acoustically.  Of course, what specific harmonic spectra a person prefers is subjective.

For instance, I'm currently trying to nail down if I actually prefer tubes, or just the transformers that tube amps often have.  I'm probably going to sell my current hybrid tube amp and Elear to help fund the Qutest purchase, and perhaps "downgrade" to a Metrum Aurix to pair with the Qutest.  It uses transformers for voltage gain with current buffered output.

I also have a side theory about transformers, that although they don't have the best distortion measurement, that the stage driving them benefits from driving a fixed load under a dynamic signal.  I still have yet to find a good explanation of how audio distortion is measured with an actively changing music signal.   Kind of how Rob describes noise floor modulation if that makes sense.   Perhaps I'll start a thread in sound science so I'm not getting too off topic.

Anyways, it's definitely possible to still appreciate Chord's dacs with external amplification.  For me, it's a necessity.


----------



## Currawong

iFenixxZ said:


> Hi guys.
> 
> What ampflier you will recommend pairing this bad boy for driving Fostex TH900/LCD-XC?



Personally, I don't find the TH900 to be very resolving. The LCD-XC were more-so though. The Hugo 2 seems to be pretty good with planers of that type. I don't honestly reckon you could get an amp under $1k, maybe more, that would do better with your headphones.  

For me, the only reason I'd suggest getting a Qutest over a Hugo 2 would be if you already had an amp and you will not ever consider the transportability factor, ie: It'll only ever sit at home.


----------



## PHC1

JWahl said:


> Different strokes for different folks.
> 
> I can appreciate the strengths of chord DACs, but for my tastes, I find the analog stages to be lacking.  This isn't unique to Chord of course, many ultra low distortion amps are often perceived as sterile.  Chord DAC/Amps like the Mojo do still manage to avoid sounding sterile considering how well they measure.  That's a feat on it's own.  But I still find good external amplification to be more dynamically impactful and spacious.
> 
> ...


 Perhaps the answer you are looking for. http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/mc_step-up_transformers_explai.html


----------



## gr8soundz (Jan 22, 2018)

JWahl said:


> My theory is that the ultra low distortion analog stages reveal flaws in the recording equipment and ADC process.   I think that allowing specific spectra of harmonic distortion, while still keeping it low, may help to simulate or at least cover up these flaws psycho-acoustically.  Of course, what specific harmonic spectra a person prefers is subjective.
> 
> For instance, I'm currently trying to nail down if I actually prefer tubes, or just the transformers that tube amps often have.



I'm in a similar boat lately. Must have rebuilt my portable stack 3 or 4 times in the past couple of weeks due to fatigue from distortion (I believe). I also prefer tubes and finally found a portable tube amp I'm happy with but have swapped sources multiple times and am constantly changing headphones. I too suspect some of the problem lies within certain recordings since my level of fatigue fluctuates between artists/albums.

Haven't tried any Chord stuff yet but figure any of their DACs (/amp?) paired with my Oppo PM-3 (which has the lowest measured distortion of all my headphones) might be the best pairing to try for lowest distortion. Maybe then I can decide if tubes are still a must (for me) going forward.


----------



## PHC1

gr8soundz said:


> I'm in a similar boat lately. Must have rebuilt my portable stack 3 or 4 times in the past couple of weeks due to fatigue from distortion (I believe). I also prefer tubes and finally found a portable tube amp I'm happy with but have swapped sources multiple times and am constantly changing headphones. I too suspect some of the problem lies within certain recordings since my level of fatigue fluctuates between artists/albums.
> 
> Haven't tried any Chord stuff yet but figure any of their DACs (/amp?) paired with my Oppo PM-3 (which has the lowest measured distortion of all my headphones) might be the best pairing to try for lowest distortion. Maybe then I can decide if tubes are still a must (for me) going forward.


Seek out better recordings instead of swapping gear. Much of the music these days is just terrible with dynamic range compression and loudness mastering. It's not the gear, it's the crap music that fatigues.


----------



## GSP_ (Jan 23, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> Most high-end DACs are standalone DACs like the Qutest. I'd venture to guess that most headphone users buying it would have used an external amp anyway. (Rather than opting for something like the Hugo 2 as an all-in-one solution.) Plenty of people prefer external amps for whatever reason. (Whereas I thought the Mojo sounded roughly as good as the $4,300 430HAD.) *I'm not sure whether most Qutest buyers will use it with speakers even if that was the company's intention. I wouldn't be surprised if more of them only used headphones,* especially given Chord's strong presence on this headphone forum. And, of course, there are those (like myself) who would use it with both speakers and headphones. (And a few, again including myself, who would experiment with direct drive.)



That’s because we are on a headphone centric site. Were we on a home-audio site, you’d see the opposite.


----------



## Music Alchemist

GSP_ said:


> That’s because we are on a headphone centric site. Were we on a home-audio site, you’d see the opposite.



I was referring to all users regardless of which sites they post on. It's likely that the majority of them would use speakers rather than headphones, but not guaranteed, and that likelihood decreases with Chord's strong presence on Head-Fi. (This doesn't count those who use both.)


----------



## GSP_

I don’t know why you’d think that. This is the only outlet that I know of where users insist on hooking up everything to headphones. In the rest of the world - DAC only products are implemented in home audio systems. I very highly doubt the majority of Qutest buyers will be headphone only users.


----------



## Music Alchemist

GSP_ said:


> I don’t know why you’d think that. This is the only outlet that I know of where users insist on hooking up everything to headphones. In the rest of the world - DAC only products are implemented in home audio systems. I very highly doubt the majority of Qutest buyers will be headphone only users.



Head-Fi is only a small part of the headphone enthusiast community. There are plenty of other headphone forums, audiophile forums which contain a good percentage of headphone users, and countless headphone users who don't post on forums. I did acknowledge that it is likely for most Qutest owners to use speakers, but there is still a possibility for more than half to use headphones.


----------



## miketlse

gr8soundz said:


> I'm in a similar boat lately. Must have rebuilt my portable stack 3 or 4 times in the past couple of weeks due to fatigue from distortion (I believe). I also prefer tubes and finally found a portable tube amp I'm happy with but have swapped sources multiple times and am constantly changing headphones. I too suspect some of the problem lies within certain recordings since my level of fatigue fluctuates between artists/albums.
> 
> Haven't tried any Chord stuff yet but figure any of their DACs (/amp?) paired with my Oppo PM-3 (which has the lowest measured distortion of all my headphones) might be the best pairing to try for lowest distortion. Maybe then I can decide if tubes are still a must (for me) going forward.


If you search the Mojo thread, you will find many posts, from owners who found that the PM-3 had good synergy with the Mojo.


----------



## emrelights1973

Currawong said:


> Personally, I don't find the TH900 to be very resolving. The LCD-XC were more-so though. The Hugo 2 seems to be pretty good with planers of that type. I don't honestly reckon you could get an amp under $1k, maybe more, that would do better with your headphones.
> 
> For me, the only reason I'd suggest getting a Qutest over a Hugo 2 would be if you already had an amp and you will not ever consider the transportability factor, ie: It'll only ever sit at home.



my thoughts put on screen better than me


----------



## emrelights1973

GSP_ said:


> I don’t know why you’d think that. This is the only outlet that I know of where users insist on hooking up everything to headphones. In the rest of the world - DAC only products are implemented in home audio systems. I very highly doubt the majority of Qutest buyers will be headphone only users.



Hugo being so popular in Naim forums as DAC, nobody with a pair of headphones.... so do not underestimate the hugo / hugo2 / TT / Dave as a DAC only....  Chord is famous for its DAC, the headphone amps had been a free gift sort of ))


----------



## plsvn

Triode User said:


> I don’t see the point of buying a Chord DAC if you don’t team it with a powerful enough amplifier to let it unleash the full might and scale of large scale orchestral works.



3W, 2A3, SET paired with 105db speakers here and... if I set the volume knob beyond 1/3-1/4 the walls start shaking


----------



## Triode User

plsvn said:


> 3W, 2A3, SET paired with 105db speakers here and... if I set the volume knob beyond 1/3-1/4 the walls start shaking



I think that is the definition then of 'powerful enough'. Of course you might just have this walls! 

At the moment I am trying a Chord SPM 1200 Mk (350W per channel) with 89dB speakers. That also shakes the walls.


----------



## jayz (Jan 23, 2018)

Talking about max volume... how many of you have tried playing their setup at high SPLs, a busy orchestral piece such as Carl Orff's fortuna from Carmina Burana and compared it to say being seated front arena at a concert hall.

Aside from the dynamic compression limitations we already know, I believe Rob totally when he says there is a lot we still don't know about how our brain interprets signals received from our ears. Therefore, reproduced music just doesn't sound the same - even if you turn it up full blast. On entering the North West Audio show once, there was a setup with a pair of TAD Compact Reference 1s blasting away at ear piercing levels, you just feel like turning down the volume after 5mins. This is not just about harsh top-end, it is the entire spectrum. I haven't understood why the industry does not seem to recognise this. To me at least, even the most capable of systems known to retain composure at extreme volume, almost all still fall short of recreating the easy-going grandeur of a full orchestra where it is often, an absolute joy to listen for hours.

For me personally, hoping the Qutest will get me a bit more closer to that destination.


----------



## gr8soundz

PHC1 said:


> Seek out better recordings instead of swapping gear. Much of the music these days is just terrible with dynamic range compression and loudness mastering. It's not the gear, it's the crap music that fatigues.



That's how I got to Head-Fi in the first place. There simply aren't many remasters of my favorite music so I spent most of 2015 upsampling (transcoding) to DSD512. If hi-res versions were available I could've saved so much time and money.

No idea how/why you assume an issue is solely due to newer stuff that I don't listen to anyway (not sure it's even worth being called music). But that doesn't make older recordings perfect. How many albums are universally considered to be perfectly recorded and mastered? I love music but no way I'd abandon a favorite artist just because they're work didn't warrant a DSD remaster. It'd make no sense to organize my listening habits by recording quality rather than personal preference. Defeats the whole purpose of musical enjoyment; more akin to just another tech demo.

AFAIK, Chord DACs are designed to oversample 2048 times for reasons including the above. That's why they stay on my radar. It's only the pricing that's kept me away (unless I finally break down and get the Mojo).


----------



## PHC1 (Jan 23, 2018)

gr8soundz said:


> That's how I got to Head-Fi in the first place. There simply aren't many remasters of my favorite music so I spent most of 2015 upsampling (transcoding) to DSD512. If hi-res versions were available I could've saved so much time and money.
> 
> No idea how/why you assume an issue is solely due to newer stuff that I don't listen to anyway (not sure it's even worth being called music). But that doesn't make older recordings perfect. How many albums are universally considered to be perfectly recorded and mastered? I love music but no way I'd abandon a favorite artist just because they're work didn't warrant a DSD remaster. It'd make no sense to organize my listening habits by recording quality rather than personal preference. Defeats the whole purpose of musical enjoyment; more akin to just another tech demo.
> 
> AFAIK, Chord DACs are designed to oversample 2048 times for reasons including the above. That's why they stay on my radar. It's only the pricing that's kept me away (unless I finally break down and get the Mojo).


Not sure where you got the idea that upsampling a crappy, loudness mastered and dynamic range compressed recording will somehow make it better? Garbage in, garbage out. You can take a picture of a turd with a 50mm lens or you can take a picture with a 100mm lens, it is still the same turd in detail..


----------



## elira

I think digital filters can have a huge impact on how it sounds, but if the result is good or bad will depend of the source. Maybe Chord filters will improve bad mastered music but it could become worse. Some music just sounds better with low revealing systems.


----------



## PHC1

elira said:


> I think digital filters can have a huge impact on how it sounds, but if the result is good or bad will depend of the source. Maybe Chord filters will improve bad mastered music but it could become worse. Some music just sounds better with low revealing systems.


The problem with dynamic range compressed source is that the peaks have been clipped. The damage has been done. Upsampling is not going to fix that. Back in the vinyl days, the recording engineers could not abuse the system too much, with the digital age they can and do because a louder CD used to sell much better to the unsuspecting consumer and that's what the artists wanted, to sell albums. With the modern era of digital streaming, there is hardly a need to do so but many of the recording engineers still do it. Read up on "Loudness Wars".  Of course the higher resolution gear only makes things worse as the lower resolution MP3 files actually do not sound as fatiguing on mid-fi consumer devices. One does not get fatigued as easily listening to music in a car or on a mid-fi Sonos speaker for example. We all want the best sound but blame the gear for the crappy sound where the source of all the problems is the actual music we feed the high resolution gear.


----------



## PHC1

If anyone need an example of how it is not easy to tell the difference between a 128kbps file and uncompressed WAV file, knock yourself out testing your audiophile grade ears. https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality


----------



## gr8soundz (Jan 23, 2018)

PHC1 said:


> Not sure where you got the idea that upsampling a crappy, loudness mastered and dynamic range compressed recording will somehow make it better? Garbage in, garbage out. You can take a picture of a turd with a 50mm lens or you can take a picture with a 100mm lens, it is still the same turd in detail..



You didn't ask any specifics and now are the only one mentioning crappy recordings or compression.

The original post was about distortion (Chord being among the best measured there) which exists everywhere including my remastered 24/88 FLAC files. Where, how much, and how noticeable it is depends on the person and the setup (i.e. tubes or no tubes). Assuming poor sources must be the cause of _any_ potential fatigue (no matter how small) in the audio chain makes little sense.


----------



## PHC1

gr8soundz said:


> You didn't ask any specifics and now are the only one mentioning crappy recordings or compression.
> 
> The original post was about distortion (Chord being among the best measured there) which exists everywhere including my remastered 24/88 FLAC files. Where, how much, and how noticeable it is depends on the person and the setup (i.e. tubes or no tubes). Assuming poor sources must be the cause of _any_ potential fatigue (no matter how small) in the audio chain makes little sense.


I guess you will be swapping gear for a very long time chasing that elusive solution then. Distortion at some inaudible level, way below what your ears can hear and the dynamic range vs the system noise floor and ambient noise floor of the room itself with say open headphones, is of no consequence to anything meaningful. Tubes or SS, great tubes sound like solid state and great solid state sounds like tubes, tubes are not the magic solution unless it is a very poor, bandwidth challenged design that colors the sound drastically. As far as distortion at some levels way below the actual dynamic range of your ears and system, it sounds great on paper and for marketing purposes. Test your headphone system and see for yourself if the dynamic range will allow to be concerned about some -110dB distortion levels. http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_dynamiccheck.php


----------



## PHC1

You can build a great race car but until you put the race gas into it, it will never achieve greatness. Music is fuel, use high octane/great quality recording and your system will perform its best. Recordings done in analog back in the day sound warm and natural, especially captured with tube mikes onto analog tapes. There are drawbacks, dynamic range was not as great, resolution was not as great but for the most part, what needed to fit, really did fit into the dynamic range envelope of the analog capture. Sure there was some tape hiss, that is not a major distraction, there are pops, clicks, other artifacts with vinyl but analog did not sound fatiguing. Enter the digital age and loudness mastering, butchering the music. Worse yet, remastered copies butchered yet again for the sake of making them sound different/better, often to the point they are unlistenable anymore. Why? For profits of course, to sell yet another remastered copy. The digital recordings done properly, especially in native high resolution sound like music should with all the resolution and dynamic range intact. Too bad it is only a handful of boutique recording studios doing it and too many high resolution upsamples being sold at ridiculous amount of money that offer no real benefit what so ever to the musical quality of the recording. This may not be the choice of music for the younger generation but have a listen to what a PCM 96 or a  or higher "Native" recording can sound like. This is what music quality should sound like with the digital tools we have today. https://soundliaison.com/


----------



## elira

It's kind of a bad idea to build a system for music you don't like just because it's high quality. I think most gear tries to improve music reproduction in general and the Qutest has 4 different filters to choose from that may help certain music to sound better. I think the best approach is to try it to see if it works with your music.


----------



## PHC1

elira said:


> It's kind of a bad idea to build a system for music you don't like just because it's high quality. I think most gear tries to improve music reproduction in general and the Qutest has 4 different filters to choose from that may help certain music to sound better. I think the best approach is to try it to see if it works with your music.


I was not suggesting one needs to change their music, simply seeking out the better recordings which often is simply not possible. We have gotten way off topic here though and this thread is for the Chord Qutest which I do intend to audition if I get a chance. I will be using it for my 2 channel audio system and will of course try it with my various headphone amps to see where a better fit for it would be.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 23, 2018)

Since it's been available for audition and purchase in the UK for some time now, I'm surprised impressions haven't started coming in.



jayz said:


> Talking about max volume... how many of you have tried playing their setup at high SPLs, a busy orchestral piece such as Carl Orff's fortuna from Carmina Burana and compared it to say being seated front arena at a concert hall.
> 
> Aside from the dynamic compression limitations we already know, I believe Rob totally when he says there is a lot we still don't know about how our brain interprets signals received from our ears. Therefore, reproduced music just doesn't sound the same - even if you turn it up full blast. On entering the North West Audio show once, there was a setup with a pair of TAD Compact Reference 1s blasting away at ear piercing levels, you just feel like turning down the volume after 5mins. This is not just about harsh top-end, it is the entire spectrum. I haven't understood why the industry does not seem to recognise this. To me at least, even the most capable of systems known to retain composure at extreme volume, almost all still fall short of recreating the easy-going grandeur of a full orchestra where it is often, an absolute joy to listen for hours.
> 
> For me personally, hoping the Qutest will get me a bit more closer to that destination.



So basically, you're saying that it's not difficult for a speaker system to get as loud as an orchestra, but we can't get it to sound as good. Quantity vs quality. That should go without saying. I've performed in orchestras and so on and have all sorts of experience as a musician. I don't think audio equipment will ever be able to fully replicate the experience of live sound, though some people may not always notice the difference. But yes, the right equipment can certainly get you closer.



gr8soundz said:


> It'd make no sense to organize my listening habits by recording quality rather than personal preference. Defeats the whole purpose of musical enjoyment; more akin to just another tech demo.





elira said:


> It's kind of a bad idea to build a system for music you don't like just because it's high quality.



This. The music you love is what's important; far more so than the quality of the recording. Check out my quotes later in this post.



gr8soundz said:


> It's only the pricing that's kept me away (unless I finally break down and get the Mojo).



You can find a used Mojo for under $400 nowadays. I owned it twice.



PHC1 said:


> Not sure where you got the idea that upsampling a crappy, loudness mastered and dynamic range compressed recording will somehow make it better? Garbage in, garbage out.





PHC1 said:


> The damage has been done. Upsampling is not going to fix that.



Hmm. Sounds like you should try a Chord DAC. 

To my (and countless others') ears, they make all music sound better.

They do far more than just upsampling. Software can be programmed to do extreme upsampling, but it won't sound nearly as good as Chord DACs and won't do even a fraction of all the things they can. (This has been covered before, but for those whose goal is fidelity, software upsampling should be avoided with Chord DACs because it interferes with their advanced digital processing and results in lower fidelity sound.)

How all this works gets very technical. You can learn a lot by reading @Rob Watts' posts.

Without going into detail, you get accuracy that is orders of magnitude greater than other DACs when it comes to timing precision and noise shaping, along with zero noise floor modulation and jitter (which, as far as I know, has never been achieved with non-Chord DACs), ultra-low distortion and output impedance, high dynamic range, and more transparent analog circuitry.

Just because a recording isn't perfect doesn't mean the DAC can't get you closer to reproducing the original analog waveform and give you better sound.



PHC1 said:


> We all want the best sound but blame the gear for the crappy sound where the source of all the problems is the actual music we feed the high resolution gear.



This is a great point. Sometimes we are indeed listening to flaws in a recording rather than flaws in our systems...but not all the time. It's well-known that higher fidelity audio gear can improve what we hear. The factors I explained above combine to give you a more faithful reproduction of recordings, and sometimes they are higher quality than you may have thought.

As for the music itself, I would like to share some relevant quotes:



Music Alchemist said:


> I would much rather listen to music I love that happens to have mediocre or average production quality than music I don't enjoy that happens to be excellently-produced. But for all music, most of the time, I want to get as close as I can to the truth of what is on the recording. I'm fine with the fact that this isn't always pretty.





Music Alchemist said:


> As I mentioned, one of my primary goals is to get as close as I can to the truth of what is on the recording. In other words, high fidelity reproduction of the countless thousands of recordings I listen to, in nearly all genres, ranging from low to high sound quality. The focus for me is the music I like regardless of how well-produced it is. If anything, better gear makes all music more enjoyable for me. But the crucial distinction is that I do not expect crappy recordings to sound like a philharmonic orchestra. The equipment is a tool to enjoy music, not the other way around.





Music Alchemist said:


> I feel sorry for anyone who exclusively listens to music with superb production quality, because they're missing out on the vast majority of awesome music out there.





PHC1 said:


> If anyone need an example of how it is not easy to tell the difference between a 128kbps file and uncompressed WAV file, knock yourself out testing your audiophile grade ears. https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality



What's interesting is that, although it is difficult to tell things apart on that link (which I've visited before), it's incredibly easy for me to hear the difference between actual 128 kbps (or even higher) MP3s and lossless, even when I convert them myself with high quality software. Low bit rate lossy files sound downright awful in comparison in my experience. I'm not sure how they got 128 kbps to sound so good on that link.



PHC1 said:


> I was not suggesting one needs to change their music, simply seeking out the better recordings which often is simply not possible.



Different recordings are different music, so...


----------



## PHC1

Music Alchemist said:


> Since it's been available for audition and purchase in the UK for some time now, I'm surprised impressions haven't started coming in.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Can't argue about the benefits of a Chord DAC since I do not own one. I have owned many DACs and now riding the Schiit train of sonic goodness. Their multibit R/2R DACs are keeping me happy at the moment. I would love to try a Chord DAC for a comparison in the near future. 

As to different recordings being different music... What I meant is a better recording of the SAME music. How many re-masters are there of the same old thing? Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, etc... One more terrible than the other. Then you find that old LP without the heavy handed remastering for the sake of selling yet another album of the same old thing and you realize that all those remasters are junk.


----------



## Music Alchemist

PHC1 said:


> Can't argue about the benefits of a Chord DAC since I do not own one. I have owned many DACs and now riding the Schiit train of sonic goodness. Their multibit R/2R DACs are keeping me happy at the moment. I would love to try a Chord DAC for a comparison in the near future.



I would love to see your comparison with the Gungnir Multibit if you get the Qutest.

As far as Chord and Schiit multibit DACs go, I only had the 2Qute (Qutest predecessor), Mojo, and Modi Multibit.

(For those who don't know: Schiit multibit DACs are hybrid R2R / resistor string, not pure resistor ladder DACs.)



PHC1 said:


> What I meant is a better recording of the SAME music.



If it's a different recording, then it is different music. Perhaps you meant a better master of the same recording.


----------



## PHC1

Music Alchemist said:


> I would love to see your comparison with the Gungnir Multibit if you get the Qutest.
> 
> As far as Chord and Schiit multibit DACs go, I only had the 2Qute (Qutest predecessor), Mojo, and Modi Multibit.
> 
> ...


Yes, a better master, sorry, my typing got ahead of my thoughts. The original recording only took place once in history and was captured onto a master tape or in digital form. I love the XRCDs for that analog warmth and naturalness they offer and there is no loudness mastering or dynamic range compression to be found anywhere near the XRCD lol.


----------



## elira

Music Alchemist said:


> As far as Chord and Schiit multibit DACs go, I only had the 2Qute (Qutest predecessor), Mojo, and Modi Multibit.



How would you describe the difference between Schiit Multibit and Chord FPGA?


----------



## Music Alchemist

elira said:


> How would you describe the difference between Schiit Multibit and Chord FPGA?



It's not really a fair comparison because I only had the entry-level Schiit multibit model. I'm sure the Yggdrasil is a lot better than that, but I haven't heard it. I owned the 2Qute and Modi Multibit at the same time (*click for pic*) and can tell you that the 2Qute was more resolving, fast, musical, dynamic, etc. The Modi Multibit sounds great for the price, but comes off as more "tubey" to me: thicker, slower, still very dynamic but comparatively more compressed. My most memorable moment comparing them was hearing drums on a particular track that struck out with strong individual impact with the 2Qute, but sounded restrained with the Modi Multibit. (Yes, I volume-matched.) But again, the 2Qute costs more than $1,000 more, so this is not a real comparison between the technological capability of either company. You'll have to look for many other comparisons (or just listen yourself) to get a grasp of all that.


----------



## PHC1

Music Alchemist said:


> It's not really a fair comparison because I only had the entry-level Schiit multibit model. I'm sure the Yggdrasil is a lot better than that, but I haven't heard it. I owned the 2Qute and Modi Multibit at the same time (*click for pic*) and can tell you that the 2Qute was more resolving, fast, musical, dynamic, etc. The Modi Multibit sounds great for the price, but comes off as more "tubey" to me: thicker, slower, still very dynamic but comparatively more compressed. My most memorable moment comparing them was hearing drums on a particular track that struck out with strong individual impact with the 2Qute, but sounded restrained with the Modi Multibit. (Yes, I volume-matched.) But again, the 2Qute costs more than $1,000 more, so this is not a real comparison between the technological capability of either company. You'll have to look for many other comparisons (or just listen yourself) to get a grasp of all that.


A member of another audio forum did a serious A/B comparison with the Yggdrasil vs Esoteric K-01X. He owns both. That's a $2.4k dac vs a $20k CDP/dac. Guess which one he preferred...


----------



## Music Alchemist

PHC1 said:


> A member of another audio forum did a serious A/B comparison with the Yggdrasil vs Esoteric K-01X. He owns both. That's a $2.4k dac vs a $20k CDP/dac. Guess which one he preferred...



I know there are plenty of DACs under $3K that many prefer over ones that cost five to six figures. (@romaz prefers the Hugo 2 over the MSB Select DAC and dCS Vivaldi stack, for example.)

But we're getting a little off-topic here...


----------



## JWahl

Music Alchemist said:


> I would love to see your comparison with the Gungnir Multibit if you get the Qutest.
> As far as Chord and Schiit multibit DACs go, I only had the 2Qute (Qutest predecessor), Mojo, and Modi Multibit.



And see, this is where the Hyperbole can get messy.  I previously owned the Gungnir MB and Yggdrasil before the Mojo, which I've had for over a year.  Clearly, I like the Mojo for what it is.  However, on overall sound alone, I prefer the former two.  Though there is a certain sound quality I like about the Mojo that I don't get with the Schiit DACs. 
What I do like about the Chord Dacs, is what they do in such a compact footprint.  I have great respect for Rob's engineering chops and the raw design efficiency of his DACs.  He's an engineer's engineer, so to speak.

If the Qutest can improve on some of the low end depth and slam that I find is more reserved with the Mojo, I'll be a happy camper.  Impressions I've read from people that have owned Mojo and 2qute seem to say that it does improve bass slam and impact.


----------



## Music Alchemist

JWahl said:


> And see, this is where the Hyperbole can get messy.  I previously owned the Gungnir MB and Yggdrasil before the Mojo, which I've had for over a year.  Clearly, I like the Mojo for what it is.  However, on overall sound alone, I prefer the former two.  Though there is a certain sound quality I like about the Mojo that I don't get with the Schiit DACs.
> What I do like about the Chord Dacs, is what they do in such a compact footprint.  I have great respect for Rob's engineering chops and the raw design efficiency of his DACs.  He's an engineer's engineer, so to speak.
> 
> If the Qutest can improve on some of the low end depth and slam that I find is more reserved with the Mojo, I'll be a happy camper.  Impressions I've read from people that have owned Mojo and 2qute seem to say that it does improve bass slam and impact.



We were at opposite ends of the spectrum there: me with higher-end Chord and lower-end Schiit and you vice versa. So the comparisons we did were not fair at all. Gotta at least compare two DACs at the same price point, ya know?

The 2Qute is definitely better than the Mojo despite both having the same effective number of taps. (The Mojo has about twice as many, but at half speed.) The Qutest and Hugo 2 have nearly twice as many taps (but at full speed), as well as other advancements. General consensus is that the Hugo 2 is closer to the DAVE than the Mojo in terms of sound quality. Most think the 2Qute sounds better than the original Hugo as well. I'm excited to find out how the Qutest compares to the Hugo 2 with the same external amp.


----------



## Triode User

JWahl said:


> And see, this is where the Hyperbole can get messy.  I previously owned the Gungnir MB and Yggdrasil before the Mojo, which I've had for over a year.  Clearly, I like the Mojo for what it is.  However, on overall sound alone, I prefer the former two.  Though there is a certain sound quality I like about the Mojo that I don't get with the Schiit DACs.
> What I do like about the Chord Dacs, is what they do in such a compact footprint.  I have great respect for Rob's engineering chops and the raw design efficiency of his DACs.  He's an engineer's engineer, so to speak.
> 
> If the Qutest can improve on some of the low end depth and slam that I find is more reserved with the Mojo, I'll be a happy camper.  Impressions I've read from people that have owned Mojo and 2qute seem to say that it does improve bass slam and impact.



Mojo is brilliant for what it sets out to do. A truly mobile DAC/headphone amp. I had it for quite a while but always in a speaker system. However, for me even the original Hugo gave a much better subjective sound. Less veiled, less muddy. Hugo2 and therefore I assume because not heard also the Qutest are a step even further in that direction and much fairer would be to compare them than the Mojo.


----------



## feelingears

No disrespect, Alchemist, just a point to consider: I don't find the same price argument as compelling because in the end, DAC differences are real but the price doesn't really map or scale to changes in sonic character (between brands). From a "running an audio business" perspective, I find companies needing to charge four or five figures for low-production run electronics to be a more compelling reason for why some DACs cost what they do, and amps, speakers, magic tweaks, etc. Those engineers and business marketeers often have kids they need to feed, clothe, etc. We all have our budgets, so I'm just saying that if you buy new, you're paying for more than the sonic character of the DAC (like the dealer and the cost structure of the business).

But I'm with you as I am eager to hear and buy a Qutest (or other esoteric R2R design) if the reviews triangulate well, even though I love my Gumby. Maybe "Gumby Analog II" is around the corner...


----------



## Music Alchemist

feelingears said:


> I don't find the same price argument as compelling because in the end, DAC differences are real but the price doesn't really map or scale to changes in sonic character (between brands).



What I meant was that just because the ~$1,300 Chord 2Qute sounds better (to me) than the $249 Schiit Modi Multibit—or the $2,399 Schiit Yggdrasil sounds better (to someone else) than the ~$500 Chord Mojo—doesn't mean that all Chord DACs are going to sound better to everyone than all Schiit DACs, or vice versa. It makes no sense to compare an entry-level product from one company to a higher-end product from another company and then make sweeping statements about the entire companies based on that limited experience. All I'm saying is that if you want to assess the product lines of two companies, you need to actually test them and give them all a chance. Since both companies have various DACs around the same price points, it makes more sense to focus on comparing ones that cost about the same and then share the opinion of which DAC one feels is better _at_ that price point. Then if a cheaper model happens to beat a more expensive one, that's another thing, but separate from opinions on which is better at a given price. Obviously, some DACs are going to outperform costlier competition. That's what Chord is all about in my eyes.


----------



## dmance

There must be a few hundred Qutest units out in the field by now.  At least in the UK.  Can anybody post first impressions?


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 24, 2018)

Mr. Rob Watts,

Can you give us more detail about the filters on the Qutest? How many there are, what they change and what colours will be displayed. Are they the same or different than the Hugo 2. Also, is there a "no filter" setting and colour. I have not been reading any Hugo threads so not familiar with the filters on any other unit.

Thank you


----------



## plsvn

from "Qutest Product Specifications" pdf available here:

Selectable Filter Options: Incisive neutral (White), Incisive neutral HF roll-off (Green), Warm (Orange), Warm HF roll-off (Red)


----------



## gad1 (Jan 24, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> What I meant was that just because the ~$1,300 Chord 2Qute sounds better (to me) than the $249 Schiit Modi Multibit—or the $2,399 Schiit Yggdrasil sounds better (to someone else) than the ~$500 Chord Mojo—doesn't mean that all Chord DACs are going to sound better to everyone than all Schiit DACs, or vice versa. It makes no sense to compare an entry-level product from one company to a higher-end product from another company and then make sweeping statements about the entire companies based on that limited experience. All I'm saying is that if you want to assess the product lines of two companies, you need to actually test them and give them all a chance. Since both companies have various DACs around the same price points, it makes more sense to focus on comparing ones that cost about the same and then share the opinion of which DAC one feels is better _at_ that price point. Then if a cheaper model happens to beat a more expensive one, that's another thing, but separate from opinions on which is better at a given price. Obviously, some DACs are going to outperform costlier competition. That's what Chord is all about in my eyes.



Qutest is in a category where comparisons to $2,400 dacs is justified.  Hugo 2 sells for $2,379.
Qutest is touted to equal or excel Hugo 2 in a speaker set up.  Hugo 2 is regularly compared
to the $2,400 Yggdrasil dac, therefor this category is a valid comparison for Qutest.  My previous
dac was a Yggddrasil which I had for 2 yrs. in my speaker only system.  I sold it because IMO
in my system there was a dryness.  I wanted a bit more life.  Yggy is a balanced design., and
is reported to sound best when connected by xlrs which is not possible with my unbalanced
preamp and amp, which may account for my dissatisfaction.  One of the reasons Qutest is
on my radar is it's unbalanced design;  also various dacs have sound signatures, and brief
experimentation with the Mojo in my system had a sound I liked even if the detail was not
in the Yggy league, so, bottom line, if user feedback is positive comparing Qutest to Hugo 2,
I'm buying one and will be comparing it to Yggy.


----------



## Music Alchemist

gad1 said:


> Qutest is in a category where comparisons to $2,400 dacs is justified.  Hugo 2 sells for $2,379.
> Qutest is touted to equal or excel Hugo 2 in a speaker set up.  Hugo 2 is regularly compared
> to the $2,400 Yggdrasil dac, therefor this category is a valid comparison for Qutest.  My previous
> dac was a Yggddrasil which I had for 2 yrs. in my speaker only system.  I sold it because IMO
> ...



I never said anything about it being a bad idea to compare the Qutest to more expensive DACs. I've stated clearly in various posts that the Qutest measures better than them anyway. (Aside from the DAVE.) My point was that if you take a $500 DAC, compare it to a $2,000+ DAC, and declare the more expensive DAC the winner, my reaction would be, "Well, so what? You should have used a higher-end model from both companies." (The Qutest qualifies as higher-end in this instance and is not Chord's entry-level DAC.) Same goes for my own comparison of a $250 DAC to a $1,300 DAC. I can't generalize the differences between the two technologies the companies use based only on that, because I did not test higher-end Schiit DACs.


----------



## gad1

Music Alchemist said:


> I never said anything about it being a bad idea to compare the Qutest to more expensive DACs. I've stated clearly in various posts that the Qutest measures better than them anyway. (Aside from the DAVE.) My point was that if you take a $500 DAC, compare it to a $2,000+ DAC, and declare the more expensive DAC the winner, my reaction would be, "Well, so what? You should have used a higher-end model from both companies." (The Qutest qualifies as higher-end in this instance and is not Chord's entry-level DAC.) Same goes for my own comparison of a $250 DAC to a $1,300 DAC. I can't generalize the differences between the two technologies the companies use based only on that, because I did not test higher-end Schiit DACs.



Sorry for the confusion, but, to quote Chords own literature,"The 2Qute is our entry level ”straight’ DAC."  Really doesn't
matter, my post stands on it's own, glad we're in agreement that a Yggdrasil to Qutest comparison is valid.

peace


----------



## Yippedidou (Jan 24, 2018)

Right now, I'm running the Hugo2 in a 2 ch. set up out of a MacMini/Audirvana+ into a Phonitor X (used as a pre-amp and HP amp), a Chord SPM 1050 and Dynaudio C1s Sig. I'm surprised how good the sound is, especially with the white filter. 3D type of imaging. The drawback is having to use less than optimal cables. Thats why I'm eager to test the Qutest (ahah). I'll be able to connect my Locus Design USB cable (B--A) and my Siltech 330i interconnects. I'm in Canada. If the USA delivery date is Feb., Canada will be March or even April. So I'm thinking of ordering directly from UK from Future Shop. Is there a drawback to do that? I've done it before for Toxic cables - took a while but arrived safely - but never for something like hardware.


----------



## Music Alchemist

gad1 said:


> Sorry for the confusion, but, to quote Chords own literature,"The 2Qute is our entry level ”straight’ DAC."



It was also their _only_ straight DAC once the QBD76 HDSD was discontinued and before the Qutest came along. 

As we all know, the Mojo is their entry-level product.


----------



## miketlse

Music Alchemist said:


> It was also their _only_ straight DAC once the QBD76 HDSD was discontinued and before the Qutest came along.
> 
> As we all know, the Mojo is their entry-level product.


entry-level mobile dac with headphone output.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Interesting thing - there are so many manufacturers, who use "latest chips", but all the DAC-talk is usually about Chord and Schiit DACs. I think my next DAC would be from one of those companies. Mostly because both companies use their own tech instead of throwing in the standard DAC-chip. For me the competitor for Chord Qutest would be a Schiit Gungnir Multibit. Schiit has both balanced and single-ended outputs and it is a cheaper option. So I hope Qutest would perform clearly better to justify the lack of balanced connections and higher price. Looking forward for somebody to compare those two. Unfortunately, in my country there would be no chance to audition one or another.


----------



## Music Alchemist

miketlse said:


> entry-level mobile dac with headphone output.



They're all DACs...


----------



## PHC1

Ragnar-BY said:


> Interesting thing - there are so many manufacturers, who use "latest chips", but all the DAC-talk is usually about Chord and Schiit DACs. I think my next DAC would be from one of those companies. Mostly because both companies use their own tech instead of throwing in the standard DAC-chip. For me the competitor for Chord Qutest would be a Schiit Gungnir Multibit. Schiit has both balanced and single-ended outputs and it is a cheaper option. So I hope Qutest would perform clearly better to justify the lack of balanced connections and higher price. Looking forward for somebody to compare those two. Unfortunately, in my country there would be no chance to audition one or another.


I will be picking up a Qutest as soon as they come out to compare against Gungnir Multibit. I need another DAC for my 2 channel anyway and will see which one stays with the headphones and which drives the speaker system. Or perhaps sell one of them in a hurry after that.


----------



## JWahl (Jan 24, 2018)

PSA for all:  I just read the Chord prices are increasing February 1st.  Don't know if it's Chord's doing or the U.S. Distributor.   I also don't know if it will affect the Qutest also, or if they will honor the introductory price for a bit longer at least.  I want to buy one, but I have to wait until mid February for the funds.

Hugo 2 is increasing to $2695, among others.

https://www.thecableco.com/beat-the-chord-price-increases-coming-february-1st

Also mentioned on TTVJ's Facebook page.

*Edit: I read elsewhere from another vendor on the forum that it is the U.S. distributor, not Chord increasing the prices.  Supposedly due to the strengthening British Pound.  This might also explain why the Stereophile article was quoting $1795.


----------



## Music Alchemist

JWahl said:


> PSA for all:  I just read the Chord prices are increasing February 1st.  Don't know if it's Chord's doing or the U.S. Distributor.   I also don't know if it will affect the Qutest also, or if they will honor the introductory price for a bit longer at least.  I want to buy one, but I have to wait until mid February for the funds.
> 
> Hugo 2 is increasing to $2695, among others.
> 
> ...



All the more reason to import from the UK and not be taken advantage of by this nonsense.


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> All the more reason to import from the UK and not be taken advantage of by this nonsense.



Don’t you guys have any import taxes? The other way around it costs us plenty to import.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 24, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Don’t you guys have any import taxes? The other way around it costs us plenty to import.



Based on online calculators, it looks like it's only two or three percent in this case.

When I imported things in the past, I never had to pay any tax, but they weren't expensive.

Personally, I think any type of import tax is outright theft, but what can ya do...


----------



## gad1

JWahl said:


> PSA for all:  I just read the Chord prices are increasing February 1st.  Don't know if it's Chord's doing or the U.S. Distributor.   I also don't know if it will affect the Qutest also, or if they will honor the introductory price for a bit longer at least.  I want to buy one, but I have to wait until mid February for the funds.
> 
> Hugo 2 is increasing to $2695, among others.
> 
> ...



Good sales strategy for Schiit


----------



## dcp10

Yippedidou said:


> Right now, I'm running the Hugo2 in a 2 ch. set up out of a MacMini/Audirvana+ into a Phonitor X (used as a pre-amp and HP amp



I can't answer your question, but I would be interested to hear why you're not using the Hugo 2 as a headphone amp please?

I'm trying to decide between purchasing the Hugo 2 or the Qutest. I currently drive Sennheiser HD800 headphones through a Lehmann Black Cube Linear (headphone amp) and want to know if the Hugo 2 would provide better headphone output than this - or, if I need to stick with the existing headphone amp, I would presumably be better off buying the Qutest. Anyone else like to chip in on this one?


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> Based on online calculators, it looks like it's only two or three percent in this case.
> 
> When I imported things in the past, I never had to pay any tax, but they weren't expensive.
> 
> Personally, I think any type of import tax is outright theft, but what can ya do...



We have import duty and vat if we import from USA to UK. I always allow at least 25% to the price paid to account for that. The final sting in the tail is when the courier makes a charge for collecting the tax. Good luck though if it doesn't work like that when going the other way across the pond.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

PHC1 said:


> I will be picking up a Qutest as soon as they come out to compare against Gungnir Multibit.


It would be interesting to read your opinion after comparison.


----------



## JWahl (Jan 25, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> All the more reason to import from the UK and not be taken advantage of by this nonsense.


 
Unfortunately, I emailed that vendor you posted, and they replied that they can't ship Chord products to the U.S. due to distributor agreements.  Quoted from the email:

"We do not usually ship Chord Electronics items outside the UK, due to the distribution agreements. Ideally, you should purchase this from your local Chord Electronics dealer in the USA. I appreciate you have concerns around this but unless we receive authorisation from Chord Electronics we are unable to ship the item. "

So for now, barring shady grey market channels, we are beholden to Bluebird Music's price gouging.  Really disappointing.


----------



## onsionsi

Rob Watts said:


> A 2A supply is shipped with qutest, but it will work fine with a 1A 5V supply.
> 
> To set the OP voltage you press the two buttons together when it's starting up - display in rainbow mode - then qutest will remain in that level. Pressing the buttons together will change the brightness of the display when in normal or working mode.



Does the Hugo2 benefits from clean power supply like Lps-1 in a desktop mode?


----------



## Rob Watts

onsionsi said:


> Does the Hugo2 benefits from clean power supply like Lps-1 in a desktop mode?


The last time I talked about linear PSU's I got into trouble (2 Qute) as I compared the supplied PSU to a car battery and could hear no difference. But some claimed they could hear a difference - unfortunately I can only post about what I hear. That said, although through my listening and measurements I am convinced that 2 Qute was completely insensitive - but of course the supplied PSU could possibly interfere with your actual power amp (some amps are hideously sensitive), so this is a clear case of YMWV.

So my advice is simple - listen to it without the charger. Listen with the supplied charger. If you can hear no difference at all, then forget about upgrading your PSU as it won't make any improvement (and could actually sound worse if it creates more noise).

I could hear no change with Mr Speakers Aeon closed with charger connected or not connected...


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 25, 2018)

dcp10 said:


> I'm trying to decide between purchasing the Hugo 2 or the Qutest. I currently drive Sennheiser HD800 headphones through a Lehmann Black Cube Linear (headphone amp) and want to know if the Hugo 2 would provide better headphone output than this - or, if I need to stick with the existing headphone amp, I would presumably be better off buying the Qutest. Anyone else like to chip in on this one?



All I know is that I heard next to no difference between the Mojo and $4,300 Simaudio MOON Neo 430HAD when driving the HD 800. I know I say this all the time, but it's a significant fact for me because it means that even the Mojo can drive the HD 800 very well. I can't comment on your amp, having never heard it.

Since you're in the UK and there are dealers everywhere, you could visit some and audition things to make a more informed decision.



Triode User said:


> We have import duty and vat if we import from USA to UK. I always allow at least 25% to the price paid to account for that. The final sting in the tail is when the courier makes a charge for collecting the tax. Good luck though if it doesn't work like that when going the other way across the pond.



25% (or higher) is outrageous. If I imported a lot of stuff and lived in a country that did that to me, I'd just move to another country. No offense, of course. And in the case of Chord, you don't need to import anything. (Lucky...) Anyway, the US has very low import tax and sometimes doesn't charge it at all, so it's not an issue for me.



JWahl said:


> Unfortunately, I emailed that vendor you posted, and they replied that they can't ship Chord products to the U.S. due to distributor agreements.  Quoted from the email:
> 
> "We do not usually ship Chord Electronics items outside the UK, due to the distribution agreements. Ideally, you should purchase this from your local Chord Electronics dealer in the USA. I appreciate you have concerns around this but unless we receive authorisation from Chord Electronics we are unable to ship the item. "
> 
> So for now, barring shady grey market channels, we are beholden to Bluebird Music's price gouging.  Really disappointing.



That...really sucks. To verify, was it this dealer? Because it says "World Wide Express Shipping" on that page.

https://www.futureshop.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-standalone-digital-audio-converter

Some Chord dealers in the UK did ship some of their products to the US in the past, but this may have changed. If they no longer do and this is due to distribution agreements, that means Chord themselves basically agreed to force Americans to pay significantly higher prices. I don't want to jump to that conclusion just yet.



Rob Watts said:


> .



Does the Qutest include plug attachments (like the 2Qute does) so it can be used in any country?


----------



## Rob Watts

The original question was about Hugo 2... But for Qutest, then use a USB battery pack, and compare to the included PSU. A USB battery pack will outperform a linear PSU as it eliminates RF noise from the mains.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Rob Watts said:


> The original question was about Hugo 2... But for Qutest, then use a USB battery pack, and compare to the included PSU. A USB battery pack will outperform a linear PSU as it eliminates RF noise from the mains.



Yes, I was multitasking (not paying close enough attention) and edited my post afterwards. What about this question?:

Does the Qutest include plug attachments (like the 2Qute does) so it can be used in any country?


----------



## plsvn

Music Alchemist said:


> Does the Qutest include plug attachments (like the 2Qute does) so it can be used in any country?



according to Product Specifications pdf (Qutest product page) it does


----------



## Music Alchemist

For those in the US: Once it arrives, you should be able to borrow the Qutest (and other Chord DACs) from The Cable Company for a small fee that is put toward any future purchases from them.

https://www.thecableco.com/lending-library
https://www.thecableco.com/chord_electronics.html



plsvn said:


> according to Product Specifications pdf (Qutest product page) it does



Thanks. This is another example of me not paying close enough attention, because I skimmed that before.


----------



## dcp10

Music Alchemist said:


> All I know is that I heard next to no difference between the Mojo and $4,300 Simaudio MOON Neo 430HAD when driving the HD 800. I know I say this all the time, but it's a significant fact for me because it means that even the Mojo can drive the HD 800 very well. I can't comment on your amp, having never heard it.



Many thanks for the feedback! I guess I should probably think about Hugo 2 instead of Qutest then...


----------



## Music Alchemist

dcp10 said:


> Many thanks for the feedback! I guess I should probably think about Hugo 2 instead of Qutest then...



The thing is, all this is so subjective (and dependent on so many factors) that you would probably want to bring your amp to shops and compare direct from the Hugo 2 to the Qutest with your amp (as well as both DACs with that amp), just to be sure what you prefer. There are plenty of others who strongly prefer an external amp with the HD 800 and various other headphones.


----------



## JWahl

Music Alchemist said:


> That...really sucks. To verify, was it this dealer? Because it says "World Wide Express Shipping" on that page.



Yes, Future shop.  Whether other dealers will, I don't know. They may risk losing rights to sell if they do.  I'm less familiar with how all that works. Or it could be a simple gentlemen's agreement.  

Ultimately Chord can make the business decisions they feel are appropriate.  I do feel like the distributors pricing structure will hurt sales for dealers and Chord, but as I've said before, Chord may also want to remain a small specialty company and not have to physically expand and grow to meet the demand of greater sales, even if it generates more revenue.    I have no crystal ball to know their long term business plan.

I do know that at $1,800 the Qutest will be more difficult for me to justify with my means.  $1600 is already pushing it, but acceptable.  Others may be willing to spend more, others much less.  That's just the uncertainty of economics.


----------



## Music Alchemist

JWahl said:


> Yes, Future shop.



They should change the info on their website to something like "World Wide Express Shipping To Anywhere Except America", then.

I wonder which other places in the world have the restrictions Americans are facing now.

I also wonder why the American distributor gets to raise the prices so much. Wouldn't be surprised if it's just because they can.

It's still possible to physically go to the UK and pick it up, but the price difference isn't large enough to justify that, and you may end up losing money that way, and may have to pay import tax as well when returning to the US.

Even for higher-end items that they never shipped to the US, some dealers in the past still let US customers order online (without VAT) and then pick it up. I don't know how things work when American citizens buy things at the shop. (Like whether they wouldn't charge VAT if you showed you were an American citizen.)


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> That...really sucks. To verify, was it this dealer? Because it says "World Wide Express Shipping" on that page.
> 
> https://www.futureshop.co.uk/chord-electronics-qutest-standalone-digital-audio-converter
> 
> Some Chord dealers in the UK did ship some of their products to the US in the past, but this may have changed. If they no longer do and this is due to distribution agreements, that means Chord themselves basically agreed to force Americans to pay significantly higher prices. I don't want to jump to that conclusion just yet.



This sort of thing is very usual for many Hi Fi products and is not something that Chord should be particularly singled out for. If you browse though other UK dealers for other products you will find other similar shipping restrictions.


----------



## Music Alchemist

The irony here is that after the price increase, the Hugo 2 will be roughly a thousand dollars more expensive than the Qutest in the US.



Triode User said:


> If you browse though other UK dealers for other products you will find other similar shipping restrictions.



You mean shipping to anywhere in the world except for America?


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> The irony here is that after the price increase, the Hugo 2 will be roughly a thousand dollars more expensive than the Qutest in the US.
> 
> You mean shipping to anywhere in the world except for America?



I think you are being slightly paranoid. The usual restriction is this . . . .


----------



## Music Alchemist

Triode User said:


> I think you are being slightly paranoid. The usual restriction is this



That is what I see more often, but some of the dealers (like the one linked above) state on the page that they ship worldwide, which is apparently not the case.


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> That is what I see more often, but some of the dealers (like the one linked above) state on the page that they ship worldwide, which is apparently not the case.


I think perhaps that is a generalised  "we ship worldwide" but omitting to add "subject to any manufacturers restrictions". In other words lazy web site compilation.


----------



## gad1 (Jan 25, 2018)

JWahl said:


> Unfortunately, I emailed that vendor you posted, and they replied that they can't ship Chord products to the U.S. due to distributor agreements.  Quoted from the email:
> 
> "We do not usually ship Chord Electronics items outside the UK, due to the distribution agreements. Ideally, you should purchase this from your local Chord Electronics dealer in the USA. I appreciate you have concerns around this but unless we receive authorisation from Chord Electronics we are unable to ship the item. "
> 
> So for now, barring shady grey market channels, we are beholden to Bluebird Music's price gouging.  Really disappointing.



The quality dac market has never been more competitive than today and consequently the used market is robust.  The big names and their fans all say they have the secret sauce.  I respect anyones decision to buy whatever dac at whatever price.  Personally my major buying factor is the perceived price to value ratio.  If I lived in jolly old England I would have already ordered a Qutest.  As an American the prospect of an inflated price due to geography and excess middleman markups is discouraging.


----------



## eddie0817

Hi all,

I am planing to purchase Qutest, does anyone know the sound quality and dynamic will improve with a 5V linear power supply?

As I know it will help for 2Qute, but not for with batteries kinds like Hugo.

Anyone can share experience?

Thanks


----------



## jayz

JWahl said:


> PSA for all:  I just read the Chord prices are increasing February 1st.  Don't know if it's Chord's doing or the U.S. Distributor.



Does this mean the Qutest will increase in price in just a couple of weeks? Would be good if someone from Chord or a dealer can clarify.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 26, 2018)

jayz said:


> Does this mean the Qutest will increase in price in just a couple of weeks? Would be good if someone from Chord or a dealer can clarify.



The US price for the Qutest has not been finalized. And it won't be here until next month. My guess is that the finalized US price will come next month and won't change for awhile.

(The UK prices remain the same for everything.)


----------



## PANURUS

dcp10 said:


> I can't answer your question, but I would be interested to hear why you're not using the Hugo 2 as a headphone amp please?
> 
> I'm trying to decide between purchasing the Hugo 2 or the Qutest. I currently drive Sennheiser HD800 headphones through a Lehmann Black Cube Linear (headphone amp) and want to know if the Hugo 2 would provide better headphone output than this - or, if I need to stick with the existing headphone amp, I would presumably be better off buying the Qutest. Anyone else like to chip in on this one?



The Hugo2 has Crossfeed.
Before, I was thinking  that Crosfeed is a gadget. I like Stax. The Orpheus did not change my mind.

Now, with a Grado PS2000e, I like Crossfeed 3.


----------



## oldson (Jan 26, 2018)

Triode User,
no mention of Qutest on there!


----------



## Triode User

oldson said:


> Triode User,
> no mention of Qutest on there!



Sorry, on where?


----------



## oldson

Triode User said:


> I think you are being slightly paranoid. The usual restriction is this . . . .



just mentions hugo2


----------



## Triode User

oldson said:


> just mentions hugo2



That's because it was just meant to illustrate what I think is a general and standard UK dealer restriction on selling (all) Chord products outside the UK.


----------



## Yippedidou (Jan 26, 2018)

dcp10 said:


> I can't answer your question, but I would be interested to hear why you're not using the Hugo 2 as a headphone amp please?
> 
> I'm trying to decide between purchasing the Hugo 2 or the Qutest. I currently drive Sennheiser HD800 headphones through a Lehmann Black Cube Linear (headphone amp) and want to know if the Hugo 2 would provide better headphone output than this - or, if I need to stick with the existing headphone amp, I would presumably be better off buying the Qutest. Anyone else like to chip in on this one?


Hi. Sorry for the late reply... i use Hugo 2 with my iems and really love it. I find it lacks scale with my AKG812 compared to the Phonitor X. And since I have the Phonitor, thats what I use for the 812 with Hugo2 for dac. I love the Hugo 2 as a dac (coming from an Aurender A10 dac). It is more punchy and the dynamics are better. My audio memory doesnt go to far behinD but it reminds me of the dynamics of the TT which I had for 2 years prior to the Aurender.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 26, 2018)

PANURUS said:


> The Hugo2 has Crossfeed.
> Before, I was thinking  that Crosfeed is a gadget. I like Stax. The Orpheus did not change my mind.
> 
> Now, with a Grado PS2000e, I like Crossfeed 3.



That's a good point...but I personally don't care about crossfeed features because I would eventually use the Smyth Realiser A16, which is the most advanced virtual surround device for headphones. You can even measure and emulate any speaker system with it!



> The emulation is essentially perfect, meaning that in immediate A/B comparison between the actual speakers and the headphones, listeners say the two are _ indistinguishablee_.



Having never tried it (or its predecessor, the A8) and being intimately familiar with the drastic differences between speakers and headphones, I'm skeptical of this claim and don't expect it to make headphones sound exactly like speakers...but it's definitely something worthy of adding to the arsenal. I wonder how many other future Qutest owners will use the Realiser.

On that note... I am considering getting back into high-end headphones earlier and putting speaker upgrades on the backburner. All these comments across the Internet (from reviewers and owners alike) about the Abyss outperforming speakers in the five to six figure range are making me so curious to spend more time with it. (Or rather, the new version, the AB-1266 Phi.) 88 dB/mW at 42 ohms makes it one of the harder-to-drive headphones, so I'd use an external amp regardless. Actually planning on driving it with my power amp (with an XLR to speaker wire adapter cable) at first. Still, it would be interesting to see how far direct drive from the Qutest (with RCA to speaker wire adapters) could make it go and whether it would sound better, at lower volumes at least. Anyway, if I do end up going that route, I'd also have to postpone the Qutest, since even with the "lite" package (with less accessories), the AB-1266 Phi costs $4,495. Ultimately, that would make the DAC expense more justified. (When I had the 2Qute, I used it with much more affordable speakers and in retrospect felt silly for doing so, because I got much better sound after upgrading the speakers and downgrading to a cheap DAC.)

P.S. I like STAX too.


----------



## dcp10

Yippedidou said:


> Hi. Sorry for the late reply... i use Hugo 2 with my iems and really love it. I find it lacks scale with my AKG812 compared to the Phonitor X. And since I have the Phonitor, thats what I use for the 812 with Hugo2 for dac. I love the Hugo 2 as a dac (coming from an Aurender A10 dac). It is more punchy and the dynamics are better. My audio memory doesnt go to far behinD but it reminds me of the dynamics of the TT which I had for 2 years prior to the Aurender.



Hi, many thanks for your reply. Interesting to hear that you find it lacks "scale" - I guess that's why some users liked the TT, as it apparently gave a weightier sound than the Hugo 1.

Would you therefore recommend - say - the Qutest + Quality Headphone Amp (in my case, Lehmann BCL) over the Hugo 2, or should I hold out for a TT2?


----------



## Yippedidou (Jan 27, 2018)

dcp10 said:


> Hi, many thanks for your reply. Interesting to hear that you find it lacks "scale" - I guess that's why some users liked the TT, as it apparently gave a weightier sound than the Hugo 1.
> 
> Would you therefore recommend - say - the Qutest + Quality Headphone Amp (in my case, Lehmann BCL) over the Hugo 2, or should I hold out for a TT2?


I owned the TT for 1 1/2 year and regret selling it. Probably the dac i loved the most of all the ones I tried. I used it as a pre through my Chord SPM1050, a dac and as a HP amp. I find Hugo2 has a similar sound character in a 2 channel set up. I dont remember well enough how the TT sounded withthe AKG812 so I cannot give you an educated opinion. I do clearly remember how it drived my AKG3003 iems and it was superb. All I'm saying here is 812/Hugo2 vs 812/Hugo2 (line out)/Phonitor X, i prefer the later because of the scale and better weight. Hugo2 as a dac alone is fantastic (for the price, it's a killer buy). I didn't have the chance to listen to the QuTest yet so cannot give you my opinion but as soon as it comes out here in Canada (me too e-mailed Future Shop UK and no luck, they wont sell outside UK), I will buy and be able to compare. But QuTest is a dac only. I believe that at the end, I will keep both: QuTest for 2 channel (linked with the Phonitor for desktop HP amp) and Hugo2 for portable matters with my AKG3003 iems.

As for a TT2, who knows what's in Chord's books for the future (who can read John Franks's mind - Maybe only Rob can! ) For me, It would be a matter of differenciation with the H2 - what does the TT2 better than the H2  or the QuTest in a 2 ch set-up- and at what cost. But for sure, I would be tempted to try it.


----------



## JWahl

I'm not sure if John Franks of Chord is following this thread but I would like to make a formal, direct request. 

Please either allow UK dealers to ship Chord products (at least Hugo 2 and below) outside of the UK,

or

Allow U.S. dealers to purchase directly from Chord.

The personal audio market has become increasingly competitive, and the anachronistic practices of the North American distributor will ultimately hurt the sales of Chord and U.S. dealers.  I can't speak for every consumer, but having the extra middle-man with an extra mark up delivers no added value to me as a consumer.  I personally do not need additional servicing of products, outside of making sure it works out of the box, or long warranties to be factored into price.  Many modern electronics vendors offer extended warranty and service plans, if that is something the consumer desires.

However, I can understand the existing practice of making the U.S. price equivalent to the VAT-included UK price as a gesture of fairness to UK consumers.  Even then, I'd rather see that 20% markup go to local dealers, than a distributor who adds little or no value to the process to me as a consumer.  Again, I can't speak for everyone, but I'm sure I'm not the only person who feels this way.


----------



## dcp10

Yippedidou said:


> As for a TT2, who knows what's in Chord's books for the future (who can read John Franks's mind - Maybe only Rob can! ) For me, It would be a matter of differenciation with the H2 - what does the TT2 better than the H2 or the QuTest in a 2 ch set-up- and at what cost. But for sure, I would be tempted to try it.


Many thanks for all your feedback - I really appreciate this! If only we knew what Chord's plans were... I would love to be able to have a TT2 to replace my existing headphone amp and to be used as a desktop DAC. In the absence of this, I can't decide between getting a Qutest now (and using with my existing headphone amp) - or getting a Hugo 2 now and risk having to still use my existing headphone amp (in which case the only benefit of the Hugo 2 is possibly the crossfeed option). I guess I may have to ask my audio dealer (the excellent Audio T in Oxford) and borrow a Hugo 2 - or be even more patient and wait a bit longer until we're certain about TT2...


----------



## ray-dude

JWahl said:


> I'm not sure if John Franks of Chord is following this thread but I would like to make a formal, direct request.
> 
> Please either allow UK dealers to ship Chord products (at least Hugo 2 and below) outside of the UK,
> 
> ...



Is it possible to "like" a post 100 times?  Get net prices to customers down so more people can enjoy this amazing kit, get direct margins up to Chord and dealers that actually provide some value.  Yes please.


----------



## panditji

mraulino said:


> Sorry if the question is stupid, but it’s just to make sure that I understood this well: if my amp’s input sensitivity is of 1.8v (as shown in the picture), it means I should select the 1v setting on the Qutest, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!



I have the same silly question and I have been using the 2Qute with the Luxman since the last 4 years with no problems as such. But wanted to know if the input voltage is 1V as in the case of Qutest, will that lead to a better sound from my system everything else remaining the same?


----------



## emrelights1973

Everything is cheaper in US, I don’t see any crowd with torches in front of Apple stores..Nike stores or anything...

Pay little more once and get on with it.... or buy your own Schiit


----------



## Triode User

JWahl said:


> I'm not sure if John Franks of Chord is following this thread but I would like to make a formal, direct request.
> 
> Please either allow UK dealers to ship Chord products (at least Hugo 2 and below) outside of the UK,
> 
> ...



Whilst you will no doubt elicit sympathy I can’t help thinking that your approach is a rather naive version of how these things work. Also, the huge drop in the price of Chord products in the USA due to the fall in the pound after the brexit vote seems now to be forgotten. If the pound rallies back to where it was pre the brexit vote then you will no doubt winge again. I am sorry but I see this from the point of view of someone who has to buy at a cost of dollar / pound parity if I buy from the states. ie you get it for say 5 dollars and I have to pay 5 pounds.


----------



## Music Alchemist

dcp10 said:


> I guess I may have to ask my audio dealer (the excellent Audio T in Oxford) and borrow a Hugo 2



What about what I suggested? Would your dealer let you bring your amp and headphones in, connect the Hugo 2 and Qutest to it, and do a comparison between the DACs? (As well as comparing the Qutest plus your amp to the Hugo 2 by itself.) If not, other dealers may be willing to accommodate if you can travel there.


----------



## granosalis (Jan 27, 2018)

I really admire you guy, 31 pages  and not a single opinion regarding how this DAC sound.
It is not a criticism, just an observation; I'm interested in Qutest too.
The hype is high and I look forward to hear more about this DAC.


----------



## oldson

dcp10 said:


> Many thanks for all your feedback - I really appreciate this! If only we knew what Chord's plans were... I would love to be able to have a TT2 to replace my existing headphone amp and to be used as a desktop DAC. In the absence of this, I can't decide between getting a Qutest now (and using with my existing headphone amp) - or getting a Hugo 2 now and risk having to still use my existing headphone amp (in which case the only benefit of the Hugo 2 is possibly the crossfeed option). I guess I may have to ask my audio dealer (the excellent Audio T in Oxford) and borrow a Hugo 2 - or be even more patient and wait a bit longer until we're certain about TT2...



do they do "no obligation" home trials then?


----------



## JWahl (Jan 27, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Whilst you will no doubt elicit sympathy I can’t help thinking that your approach is a rather naive version of how these things work. Also, the huge drop in the price of Chord products in the USA due to the fall in the pound after the brexit vote seems now to be forgotten. If the pound rallies back to where it was pre the brexit vote then you will no doubt winge again. I am sorry but I see this from the point of view of someone who has to buy at a cost of dollar / pound parity if I buy from the states. ie you get it for say 5 dollars and I have to pay 5 pounds.



With all respect, the exchange rates are irrelevant to what I was saying.  There's not much consumers can realistically do with regards to exchange rates and government taxes.   Even if the pound doubled, it would still have nothing to do with what I was saying .

What I'm talking about is a distributor charging an additional markup, far and above the margins already factored into MSRP and independent of the exchange rates.

I do also understand the purpose of distributors.  They take on a lot of the logistics headaches from manufacturers by buying in bulk and then typically offer to dealers the service of regional warranty servicing and experience in working with customs for imports.

This isn't me whining, I'm just saying that markets change, and that companies who fail to adapt to markets get left behind.  Look at old retailers compared to Amazon, for instance.

Others have taken creative new approaches like Massdrop, which takes the benefits of a distributor to manufacturers and sells direct to consumers with the trade off of periodic sales to get bulk commitments.

It's not the only way of course, but as I said, markets change over time .


----------



## jayz (Jan 27, 2018)

I'm interested to hear from anyone who run a 8+ meter length digital coax cable between source and 2qute or dave? Have you noticed any affect on the sound quality potentially due to rf interference getting into the digital section. On the same note, I wonder why the coax input has no galvanic isolation, surely there is a potential for noise from the source to sneak in to the dac through this channel similar to usb.


----------



## Triode User

JWahl said:


> With all respect, the exchange rates are irrelevant to what I was saying.  There's not much consumers can realistically do with regards to exchange rates and government taxes.   Even if the pound doubled, it would still have nothing to do with what I was saying .
> 
> What I'm talking about is a distributor charging an additional markup, far and above the margins already factored into MSRP and independent of the exchange rates.
> 
> ...



When you have worked it out and succeeded I will rejoice if I can buy USA kit in the uk for the same price you guys pay. Let me just say I have my sceptical hat on and I very much doubt that it is as simple as you make out.


----------



## Yippedidou

granosalis said:


> I really admire you guy, 31 pages  and not a single opinion regarding how this DAC sound.
> It is not a criticism, just an observation; I'm interested in Qutest too.
> The hype is high and I look forward to hear more about this DAC.


Its just out, only in UK. Wait... You'll see, its going to pour.... Look at the Hugo2 thread... How many pages?


----------



## JWahl (Jan 27, 2018)

Triode User said:


> When you have worked it out and succeeded I will rejoice if I can buy USA kit in the uk for the same price you guys pay. Let me just say I have my sceptical hat on and I very much doubt that it is as simple as you make out.



You're right, it's not simple.  And I certainly sympathize with the additional costs for European consumers importing products from outside the E.U.  And if there are E.U. import distributors who charge well above and beyond VAT and import duties for American products, I hope that consumers there would also voice their displeasure.  I like Chord's products and I want to see them continue to succeed and expand, if they so desire.

Of course, I'm a little biased because I want to buy a Qutest, but there's the possibility it now may be priced outside of my means.  It could be a killer choice in the mid-thousand price range.  I'm pretty sure dealers are pushing back too, though.  Moon Audio is listing $1,995 for the Qutest, but then says the U.S. price is not finalized and then listed the U.K. with-VAT price. (https://www.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac.html)  So I'm guessing dealers are also trying to negotiate for a better price.  But I can accept the directly with-vat exchange rate price being the U.S. retail ~$1600.  I think that's a fair compromise for everyone involved.  Would I like to see it for less?  Of course, but I'm realistic.  I know, outside of the Mojo, Chord isn't really a big volume-production type of company, and that's perfectly OK.


----------



## Music Alchemist

JWahl said:


> I want to buy a Qutest, but there's the possibility it now may be priced out my means.



You could sell your Mojo and some headphones (either the HD 650 or Elear; whichever you like less; I think the Elear lives up to its "super HD 650" reputation) to more easily afford it.


----------



## JWahl

Music Alchemist said:


> You could sell your Mojo and some headphones (either the HD 650 or Elear; whichever you like less; I think the Elear lives up to its "super HD 650" reputation) to more easily afford it.





Ha, that's actually exactly what I'm doing.  I just sold my T3, I'm putting up my Elear soon and keeping the HD-650.  Then I'll sell the Mojo.  I've ordered an iFi Micro iCan SE in the meantime to hold me over for amplification.  Then later on I can upgrade my headphones and amp again.


----------



## PanusKatus

granosalis said:


> I really admire you guy, 31 pages  and not a single opinion regarding how this DAC sound.
> It is not a criticism, just an observation; I'm interested in Qutest too.
> The hype is high and I look forward to hear more about this DAC.



It doesn’t come out until next month, even here in the UK.


----------



## Music Alchemist

PanusKatus said:


> It doesn’t come out until next month, even here in the UK.



So dealers like this one let you audition it but not purchase it?


----------



## PanusKatus

Music Alchemist said:


> So dealers like this one let you audition it but not purchase it?



I don’t know. Have you asked them?


----------



## Music Alchemist

PanusKatus said:


> I don’t know. Have you asked them?



The point is, they have it for demonstration in their store, so it would be odd if they didn't let anyone purchase it yet. And I think I've seen other UK dealers that stock and sell it.


----------



## PanusKatus

Music Alchemist said:


> The point is, they have it for demonstration in their store, so it would be odd if they didn't let anyone purchase it yet. And I think I've seen other UK dealers that stock and sell it.



Being able to purchase one and actually walk out of the store with one are not the same things. I bought mine 11th January from my local store but I won’t get it until it comes out next month.


----------



## Yippedidou

When I looked at the Future Shop UK site thursday, It was marked available.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Yippedidou said:


> When I looked at the Future Shop UK site thursday, It was marked available.



Yep, and it also says it usually ships within 7-10 days. (But, as covered earlier, not to the US.)


----------



## PanusKatus

Well if a British head-fi member has got one then we’ll get an impression soon enough, won’t we? Again, being marked as “available” does not necessarily mean you can simply walk in, pay and walk out with a shiny new Qutest. As far as I know, members of the British public won’t get their hands on one until they come out next month. Of course, I could be wrong and those reviews and first impressions will come flooding in any second not. Sorry, I meant “now”.


----------



## gintamafans (Jan 27, 2018)

TBH, I truly hope chord can do something with bluebird, because I believe in north america we are paying more than anywhere in the world for chord products. AND extremely expensive in canada seriously. (just to put it in perspective, a friend of mine was able to get a new chord dave in china for as little as under 7k usd brand new, which if i were to buy in canada the price after tax can get me as close as to buying TWO dave in china. Or for 2qute, as of today you can get it as low as under $680 usd brand new in china. So now you can imagine how much of a markup bluebird is making. To me that is far more than VAT imo which makes no sense at all. If qutest came out like super expensive in NA, in which could be enough a thousand dollar more than china, I think I will possibly just grap one on my next vacation then, because I saved more money on buying a ticket for the trip. LOL


----------



## Music Alchemist

gintamafans said:


> TBH, I truly hope chord can do something with bluebird, because I believe in north america we are paying more than anywhere in the world for chord products. AND extremely expensive in canada seriously. (just to put it in perspective, a friend of mine was able to get a new chord dave in china for as little as under 7k usd brand new, which if i were to buy in canada the price after tax can get me as close as to buying TWO dave in china. Or for 2qute, as of today you can get it as low as under $680 usd brand new in china. So now you can imagine how much of a markup bluebird is making. To me that is far more than VAT imo which makes no sense at all. If qutest came out like super expensive in NA, in which could be enough a thousand dollar more than china, I think I will possibly just grap one on my next vacation then, because I saved more money on buying a ticket for the trip. LOL



I know what you mean...but are you sure those were authorized dealers in China?


----------



## gintamafans (Jan 28, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> I know what you mean...but are you sure those were authorized dealers in China?



Not only sure and I can say there were way too many of them, from local to online offers similar prices to each other. Authorized dealer as well. The friend of mine who bought the dave from sold at least a few in a month lol, and thats was just one that he knows of that was close to him which has both online and local shop. Since this is a successor of 2Qute thread, I would also like the mention something I found ridiculous.  As before the launch of Qutest, I was actually trying to buy a used 2Qute, and have contacted quite a few on this forum or else where platform in north america. However I got pretty much no luck of even close to the price of how dealers in china which offers at least 30% less than those used but are new, though I couldnt buy it as they only use the chinese platform for sale for security reasons. However, they would likely to offer even better deal if i were to buy them in person. (which I would have saved more even including the ticket to china LOL)


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 28, 2018)

gintamafans said:


> Not only sure and I can say there were way too many of them, from local to online offers similar prices to each other. Authorized dealer as well. The friend of mine who bought the dave from sold at least a few in a month lol, and thats was just one that he knows of that was close to him which has both online and local shop. Since this is a successor of 2Qute thread, I would also like the mention something I found ridiculous.  As before the launch of Qutest, I was actually trying to buy a used 2Qute, and have contacted quite a few on this forum or else where platform in north america. However I got pretty much no luck of even close to the price of how dealers in china which offers at least 30% less than those used but are new, though I couldnt buy it as they only use the chinese platform for sale for security reasons. However, they would likely to offer even better deal if i were to buy them in person. (which I would have saved more even including the ticket to china LOL)



The UK price (including VAT) for the DAVE is £8,499. That's about $12,043 USD.

Even without VAT, that's like $10K, not $7K.

In other words, customers in China are getting far lower prices than customers in the UK despite Chord themselves being in the UK.

Sure, they don't have to worry about the 20% VAT in China, but they still have to deal with the costs of importing everything (and possibly other factors), so how is it under $7K instead of over $10K?

I smell something fishy.


----------



## gintamafans

Music Alchemist said:


> The UK price (including VAT) for the DAVE is £8,499. That's about $12,043 USD.
> 
> Even without VAT, that's like $10K, not $7K.
> 
> ...




Well then that fishy smell is something on the bluebird side. Because from what my friend told me, the distributor(there is only one in china I believe)  he is super friendly and nice person.


----------



## Music Alchemist

gintamafans said:


> Well then that fishy smell is something on the bluebird side. Because from what my friend told me, the distributor(there is only one in china I believe)  he is super friendly and nice person.



No, this has nothing to do with Bluebird or the US, nor does it have anything to do with how friendly and nice someone is.

I am talking about the fact that the DAVE is over $12K in the UK with VAT and ~$10K without VAT...so how is it under $7K in China? Surely if they were authorized dealers, this would not be allowed. If anyone has an answer, let me know. (And this applies to all Chord products. I just used the DAVE as an example.)


----------



## gintamafans

Music Alchemist said:


> No, this has nothing to do with Bluebird or the US, nor does it have anything to do with how friendly and nice someone is.
> 
> I am talking about the fact that the DAVE is over $12K in the UK with VAT and ~$10K without VAT...so how is it under $7K in China? Surely if they were authorized dealers, this would not be allowed. If anyone has an answer, let me know. (And this applies to all Chord products. I just used the DAVE as an example.)



I sure want to know why too. especially in china not only they are selling it so cheap but also, they are listing it that cheap on the chinese online platform. Listed low, and if you ask the customer service they are more willingly to give even lower prices. And if you go to the shop directly with cash, they are even more happy to give you greater prices lol.


----------



## seeteeyou

https://hiendpanda.taobao.com/category-937296854.htm

List is more like $8.5K (i.e. 53,800 RMB) and we just need to ask them how much they're actually asking for







They're indeed the sole authorized dealer in China


----------



## miketlse

JWahl said:


> You're right, it's not simple.  And I certainly sympathize with the additional costs for European consumers importing products from outside the E.U.  And if there are E.U. import distributors who charge well above and beyond VAT and import duties for American products, I hope that consumers there would also voice their displeasure.  I like Chord's products and I want to see them continue to succeed and expand, if they so desire.
> 
> Of course, I'm a little biased because I want to buy a Qutest, but there's the possibility it now may be priced outside of my means.  It could be a killer choice in the mid-thousand price range.  I'm pretty sure dealers are pushing back too, though.  Moon Audio is listing $1,995 for the Qutest, but then says the U.S. price is not finalized and then listed the U.K. with-VAT price. (https://www.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac.html)  So I'm guessing dealers are also trying to negotiate for a better price.  But I can accept the directly with-vat exchange rate price being the U.S. retail ~$1600.  I think that's a fair compromise for everyone involved.  Would I like to see it for less?  Of course, but I'm realistic.  I know, outside of the Mojo, Chord isn't really a big volume-production type of company, and that's perfectly OK.


Your photo does look too young to remember what things were like 20 years ago for those of us from the UK. The US price for things was usually half the UK price. So when we visited the US, we travelled with near empty suitcases, and the clothes we stood up in. Then we bought all our holiday clothes (and goodies) in the US, because they were so much cheaper.
The pendulum has now swung a bit the other way - please don't complain how hard done by you are, compared to Chord lovers living in the UK/europe.


----------



## emrelights1973

Dealer sells it without the margin maybe


----------



## JWahl

miketlse said:


> Your photo does look too young to remember what things were like 20 years ago for those of us from the UK. The US price for things was usually half the UK price. So when we visited the US, we travelled with near empty suitcases, and the clothes we stood up in. Then we bought all our holiday clothes (and goodies) in the US, because they were so much cheaper.
> The pendulum has now swung a bit the other way - please don't complain how hard done by you are, compared to Chord lovers living in the UK/europe.



I'm 31, so probably not.  However, as I keep trying to say, I'm not complaining about exchange rates and taxes, that's out of anyone's control.  I'm simply talking about the actions of the distributors that are independent of exchange rates and taxes.  I don't understand why my post is being misrepresented as complaining about exchange rates and taxes.  I've tried to clarify this as much as possible.


----------



## miketlse

JWahl said:


> I'm 31, so probably not.  However, as I keep trying to say, I'm not complaining about exchange rates and taxes, that's out of anyone's control.  I'm simply talking about the actions of the distributors that are independent of exchange rates and taxes.  I don't understand why my post is being misrepresented as complaining about exchange rates and taxes.  I've tried to clarify this as much as possible.


Did I mention exchange rates or taxes?
In the UK, we had twenty or thirty years of always having to pay more for goods, than we would have had to pay in the US.
We just had to grin and bear it.
Now we must have had nearly two years of some US head-fiers complaining that the US price for Chord products is dearer than the UK price.
It has become like listening to a scratched record.
Just grin and bear it, or emigrate to the UK.


----------



## JWahl

miketlse said:


> Did I mention exchange rates or taxes?
> In the UK, we had twenty or thirty years of always having to pay more for goods, than we would have had to pay in the US.
> We just had to grin and bear it.
> Just grin and bear it, or emigrate to the UK.


 
Just to be clear, I don't intend to come off as hostile or antagonistic to anyone, so thank you for not reacting too defensively.  The point is that the main reason why people from different countries would have significantly different prices for the same goods that vary over time is exchange rates and taxes, and to a lesser extent, greater shipping costs.  I do realize that some people will complain about Chord prices regardless.  I'm not complaining about the pre-existing prices, so much as the significant additional price increases the distributor is enacting on February 1st that don't really correlate to any significant cost increase or significant value the distributor is adding to the consumer end.  That is all.


----------



## miketlse

JWahl said:


> Just to be clear, I don't intend to come off as hostile or antagonistic to anyone, so thank you for not reacting too defensively.  The point is that the main reason why people from different countries would have significantly different prices for the same goods that vary over time is exchange rates and taxes, and to a lesser extent, greater shipping costs.  I do realize that some people will complain about Chord prices regardless.  I'm not complaining about the pre-existing prices, so much as the significant additional price increases the distributor is enacting on February 1st that don't really correlate to any significant cost increase or significant value the distributor is adding to the consumer end.  That is all.


I'm not trying to be hostile to you either.
I have my own doubts about some distributors justify their markups, but the only drivers for change can be Chord requests to the distributor, or consumer pressure.


----------



## maxh22

Another option would be to use one of those shipment forwarding services and buy it in the UK and through the service for an extra fee ship it to the US. It might still be cheaper this way rather than getting it through Bluebird.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Jan 28, 2018)

seeteeyou said:


> List is more like $8.5K (i.e. 53,800 RMB) and we just need to ask them how much they're actually asking for
> 
> They're indeed the sole authorized dealer in China



In other words, all those other "dealers" in China (and those who purchase from them) are dealing in the black/grey market. (Or so it seems.)



JWahl said:


> However, as I keep trying to say, I'm not complaining about exchange rates and taxes, that's out of anyone's control. I'm simply talking about the actions of the distributors that are independent of exchange rates and taxes. I don't understand why my post is being misrepresented as complaining about exchange rates and taxes. I've tried to clarify this as much as possible.





JWahl said:


> I'm not complaining about the pre-existing prices, so much as the significant additional price increases the distributor is enacting on February 1st that don't really correlate to any significant cost increase or significant value the distributor is adding to the consumer end. That is all.



Come to think of it, though, it would appear that this _is_ simply due to the currency exchange rates. (And perhaps import taxes as well.) Looks like we were wrong. See below.



maxh22 said:


> Another option would be to use one of those shipment forwarding services and buy it in the UK and through the service for an extra fee ship it to the US. It might still be cheaper this way rather than getting it through Bluebird.



I wouldn't be so sure. Here are the UK (VAT included) prices for some Chord products, then approximately converted to USD and compared to the US prices before and after February 1st.

Mojo: £399 / $565 / $529 / $579
2Qute: £995 / $1,410 / $1,349 / $1,495
Qutest: £1,195 / $1,693 / ? (US price not finalized)
Hugo 2: £1,800 / $2,550 / $2,379 / $2,695
Hugo TT: £3,199 / $4,533 / $3,995 / $4,795
DAVE: £8,499 / $12,043 / $11,288 (at least from this dealer) / ? (not sure what the US price would be after February 1st)

Basically, the current US prices are actually lower (sometimes by quite a bit) than the UK prices, so the US prices will be increased soon to reflect the stronger value of the pound.

Even though I'm assuming the American distributor does not pay VAT, there are bound to be other expenses and factors involved when importing Chord products to America.

So all this is understandable, and some of us shouldn't have jumped to conclusions about Bluebird Music.

(For those who don't know, they are the Chord Electronics distributor for the US and Canada. A complete list of distributors can be found *here*.)


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> Basically, the current US prices are actually lower (sometimes by quite a bit) than the UK prices, so the US prices will be increased soon to reflect the stronger value of the pound.



That might just be all there is to it. Sometimes things are simpler that they at first seem.


----------



## JWahl

Music Alchemist said:


> Even though I'm assuming the American distributor does not pay VAT, there are bound to be other expenses and factors involved when importing Chord products to America.
> 
> So all this is understandable, and some of us shouldn't have jumped to conclusions about Bluebird Music.
> 
> (For those who don't know, they are the Chord Electronics distributor for the US and Canada. A complete list of distributors can be found *here*.)



I was aware of all this, and perhaps I communicated it poorly before.  I suspect they are increasing prices more than the rate in anticipation of continued increases in the value of the pound.  In the end, regardless of any of our personal preferences, the markets will decide if it was a wise business decision on the part of the distributor.  It is, of course, a complex business decision that has a lot of variables at play.


----------



## seeteeyou

Music Alchemist said:


> In other words, all those other "dealers" in China (and those who purchase from them) are dealing in the black/grey market. (Or so it seems.)


It depends. Chord actually listed 15 dealers in China on their official site as shown below:

https://chordelectronics.co.uk/dealer-locator/?country=CN






Here's the catch, they're only providing 12 months of warranty for ALL *mobile* products (i.e. battery-powered ones) from Chord Electronics

https://www.facebook.com/zesenaudio/posts/1471630716253732

Register online and extend the period from 12 months to 24 months

http://erji.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1927580

Paying more in UK and we're getting 60 months of warranty

https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/dave/
http://www.nintronics.co.uk/Headpho...dphone-amplifiers/chord-electronics-dave.html

Paying (much) less in China and that's why the warranty will only last for 24 months by default

http://erji.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1943007
http://erji.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1972239

And then there's yet another caveat emptor


----------



## gintamafans

seeteeyou said:


> It depends. Chord actually listed 15 dealers in China on their official site as shown below:
> 
> https://chordelectronics.co.uk/dealer-locator/?country=CN
> 
> ...



ok now i kinda understand why we pay so much more in NA, so can we get 2 years warranty instead?


----------



## Music Alchemist

gintamafans said:


> ok now i kinda understand why we pay so much more in NA, so can we get 2 years warranty instead?



Qutest normally has a 3 year warranty. Their entry-level products (like Mojo and Poly) are 1 year and the higher-end products (like DAVE) are 5 years.


----------



## gintamafans (Jan 28, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> Qutest normally has a 3 year warranty. Their entry-level products (like Mojo and Poly) are 1 year and the higher-end products (like DAVE) are 5 years.



correct me if i were wrong so that means I still pay a lot more than china but getting the same service.......

also...regarding the price, in US or Canada we still have to pay taxes according to places some can be a lot and some can be nothing. However all taxes in china I believe are included in that sale price.


----------



## Music Alchemist

gintamafans said:


> correct me if i were wrong so that means I still pay a lot more than china but getting the same service.......



According to the post above, it would appear that the warranty lasts for 2 years in China, but is void if you buy it in China and bring it elsewhere or have it shipped to you elsewhere. That's how I interpreted it. If this is the case, you get no warranty from China and 3 years warranty if you buy it in your own country. I could be mistaken on some points, however.


----------



## gintamafans

Music Alchemist said:


> According to the post above, it would appear that the warranty lasts for 2 years in China, but is void if you buy it in China and bring it elsewhere or have it shipped to you elsewhere. That's how I interpreted it. If this is the case, you get no warranty from China and 3 years warranty if you buy it in your own country. I could be mistaken on some points, however.



Isnt that just a way to prevent us from buying overseas? just to protect profits of those sellers here? TBH lets be clear that the price different from china to NA isn't just a few hundred bucks....even if we are looking at lower end products for example 2Qute, the differences still huge. Also if you were to look deeply for prices in china for headphone you would also know they are cheaper there as well, but they were never a thousand bucks different for higher end or lower end products. same goes for other brands for dac and amp. From what I have experienced since I lay my eyes on chord products, they are the only one makes me think I should go through the trouble of going on a plane and buying it else where.

Anyways I guess I should stop the complain here since this is an important thread for Qutest which I look forward for  so long, but if I was able to save one thousand dollar I would just rather go china and buy one instead ( if it was tested and works during the day of my travel what else could really happen to them? or I can just ship them back to china for warranty isnt it? Lastly, hugo2 is at least a thousand dollar canadian cheaper to buy in china now.


----------



## seeteeyou

Even if we're marking packages as "used + defective goods for repair ONLY" or maybe stuff like a "gift" of some sort, Chinese customs might (or might not if we're getting lucky) charge some fees whenever we're shipping electronics back to China. And then we might also have to deal with stuff like petty thefts etc. if someone were stealing / swapping packages in China. We could insure anything we want but in the end when SHTF in China, most likely Chinese companies aren't gonna compensate anyone since they're relatively "barbaric" if you will. (I'm speaking as a 100% Chinese myself.)


----------



## PanusKatus (Jan 29, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> The point is, they have it for demonstration in their store, so it would be odd if they didn't let anyone purchase it yet. And I think I've seen other UK dealers that stock and sell it.



I’ve enquired  for you. They don’t currently have them for demonstration as they haven’t had them in yet. They should arrive in the next week. “Available for demo” actually means you can book a demo. This is also the case with my local where I bought mine earlier this month. In other words, the Qutest hasn’t come out yet. No need to thank me.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jan 30, 2018)

As part of getting ready to purchase the Qutest I realized I don't have a USB A-B cable.  I have noticed that a lot of companies show diagrams of their cables and the data pair are not twisted.  I have also noticed that they don't display the USB certification label.  Since the Qutest has galvanic isolation will this allow me to use pretty much any USB cable?

Also, does anyone make a USB data only cable with some sort of connector to allow it to be recognized?


----------



## Music Alchemist

New promo photos!

























dawktah2 said:


> As part of getting ready to purchase the Qutest I realized I don't have a USB A-B cable.  I have noticed that a lot of companies show diagrams of their cables and the data pair are not twisted.  I have also noticed that they don't display the USB certification label.  Since the Qutest has galvanic isolation will this allow me to use pretty much any USB cable?
> 
> Also, does anyone make a USB data only cable with some sort of connector to allow it to be recognized?



The Qutest comes with a standard 2 meter USB A to B cable, but yes, you should be able to use any other USB cable with a B connector on one end.

Data only USB cables exist, but they have potential issues (some can even damage your DAC, from what I've heard), so if you want to learn more, just Google it.


----------



## dawktah2

Music Alchemist said:


> New promo photos!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Excellent thanks!


----------



## agedbest

Music Alchemist said:


> The Qutest comes with a standard 2 meter USB A to B cable, but yes, you should be able to use any other USB cable with a B connector on one end.
> 
> Data only USB cables exist, but they have potential issues (some can even damage your DAC, from what I've heard), so if you want to learn more, just Google it.




Sorry, but  USB is a stardard cable,.. issues? maybe... if data cable is not twisted, but where did you heard "some can even damage your DAC"?


----------



## Music Alchemist

agedbest said:


> Sorry, but  USB is a stardard cable,.. issues? maybe... if data cable is not twisted, but where did you heard "some can even damage your DAC"?



Just to be clear for anyone reading this, we're talking about data only USB cables. Most USB cables have both data and power.

Google research. For example:

https://www.amazon.com/Data-Only-Audiophile-USB-Ungrounded/dp/B00WFF5FZS


> You always want the ground lead connected in a USB cable, no matter what DAC you are using. You run the risk of damaging your DAC if the ground connector is not intact. It may work for a while but the risk is always there...


----------



## agedbest

for data transfer cable better if short as possible, data twisted pair, schermature, ferrite.... if you know more, please add


----------



## agedbest (Jan 31, 2018)

what you post is an audio cable not grounded

are you telling me a grounded cable can damage the DAC?


----------



## Music Alchemist

agedbest said:


> are you telling me a grounded cable can damage the DAC?



Someone else said that an _un_grounded cable could damage the DAC. I don't know much about it; just sharing info that could potentially help others.


----------



## plsvn (Jan 31, 2018)

I've been using no-Vpower USB cables (Elijah Audio "Konvertible Lite" and "Isolate CU") with both a Metrum Hex and a 2Qute with no issue at all either with a Mac mini and a femto Auralic Aries as sources


----------



## agedbest

someone can test if the Chord USB cables are data only?
if them are grounded or ungrounded?


----------



## Music Alchemist

agedbest said:


> someone can test if the Chord USB cables are data only?
> if them are grounded or ungrounded?



Nearly all USB cables have both power and signal. Unless otherwise specified, it should be both.

Side note: Chord Electronics and The Chord Company are two different companies; the latter specializing in cables.


----------



## dawktah2

Is the Qutest female USB connector only wired/soldered on the data and "-" inside the unit to keep from accidentally applying power to the connector? Is this what constitutes the initial stages of galvanic isolation?


----------



## Music Alchemist

dawktah2 said:


> Is the Qutest female USB connector only wired/soldered on the data and "-" inside the unit to keep from accidentally applying power to the connector? Is this what constitutes the initial stages of galvanic isolation?



The DAC is galvanically isolated on its own merit. As far as I can tell, the USB cable used has nothing to do with it, and the supplied USB cable is a standard one with both power and signal.


----------



## agedbest

Music Alchemist said:


> The DAC is galvanically isolated on its own merit. As far as I can tell, the USB cable used has nothing to do with it, and the supplied USB cable is a standard one with both power and signal.




now it is established

so if Chord uses a normal and simple USB A-B stardard

you can use everything you want, and without damaging the DAC

no special and expensive cable is needed


----------



## Music Alchemist

agedbest said:


> now it is established
> 
> so if Chord uses a normal and simple USB A-B stardard
> 
> ...



Well, including a certain cable with a product doesn't mean that's the one they use themselves. Many prefer pricey aftermarket USB cables. Just read through the Chord threads and audiophile forums in general. (Personally, I wouldn't bother upgrading cables until I had spent five figures on a system.)


----------



## agedbest

this is so

a simple and normal well-shielded cable, ferrite and data twisted is better


----------



## jayz

What is the consensus so far regarding adding ferrites? Here is what I am thinking - coax cable will get a pair, one clamped at each end and power cable will get one, clamped close to Qutest.

Also, any update on Qutest reaching dealerships? As far as I can see, it is still not available to purchase in the UK.


----------



## dawktah2

I'd be rather annoyed to cut open a few hundred dollar USB cable to find the data pair isn't twisted. Which is the 1.1  or 2.0 certification, correct?


----------



## Music Alchemist

jayz said:


> As far as I can see, it is still not available to purchase in the UK.



Plenty of people have preordered it, and you can too.

Although, according to those who inquired, they do not ship this to the US, the order form at Futureshop (just as an example) can still accept those parameters. I put in my country, state, and zip code, selected the cheapest shipping method, and took a screenshot. (Notice the ~$1,400 USD price without VAT.)


----------



## agedbest

dawktah2 said:


> I'd be rather annoyed to cut open a few hundred dollar USB cable to find the data pair isn't twisted. Which is the 1.1  or 2.0 certification, correct?




Correct

....an USB 2.0 certified is prefered


----------



## dmance

I've now reconsidered my Qutest pre-order and am just going to get a Hugo2 - barring any killer review in the next month or so.  I drive loudspeakers and either Hugo2 or Qutest would work for me.  Despite the Hugo2's lack of galvanic isolation (which I will provide myself with an Intona and Ferrites), with Hugo2 I get the benefit of:

volume control (more convenient than using the 32-bit input via USB to modulate the volume)
an AMP - driving high efficiency speakers directly should I choose
batteries let me float my source chain off AC interference (and saving money with an after-market battery for Qutest)
compatible with any future M-Scaler and imminent 2Go module
Yes, Qutest is less expensive but used Hugo2's are available now and seem to have held their resale value.


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> Plenty of people have preordered it, and you can too.
> 
> Although, according to those who inquired, they do not ship this to the US, the order form at Futureshop (just as an example) can still accept those parameters. I put in my country, state, and zip code, selected the cheapest shipping method, and took a screenshot. (Notice the ~$1,400 USD price without VAT.)



It will be interesting to see how you get on. I suspect that when a human looks at the order they will pick up the fact that it contradicts the Chord Dealer requirements not to ship abroad and it will be cancelled.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Triode User said:


> It will be interesting to see how you get on. I suspect that when a human looks at the order they will pick up the fact that it contradicts the Chord Dealer requirements not to ship abroad and it will be cancelled.



Dude... I clearly stated right there in my post that they do not ship to the US, as others have covered. Don't tell me you didn't see that. I posted the screenshot as an example to illustrate the fact that it is already available for purchase even if it is not being shipped yet. (Though I heard from various sources that it would be shipping by the end of January, so perhaps it is now.)

I don't know which restrictions are placed on countries other than the US and Canada. For all I know, they may ship it to certain countries outside of the UK.


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> Dude... I clearly stated right there in my post that they do not ship to the US, as others have covered. Don't tell me you didn't see that. I posted the screenshot as an example to illustrate the fact that it is already available for purchase even if it is not being shipped yet. (Though I heard from various sources that it would be shipping by the end of January, so perhaps it is now.)
> 
> I don't know which restrictions are placed on countries other than the US and Canada. For all I know, they may ship it to certain countries outside of the UK.



Dude  . . . . You actually said, "_Although, according to those who inquired, they do not ship this to the US, the order form at Futureshop (just as an example) can still accept those parameters. I put in my country, state, and zip code, selected the cheapest shipping method, and took a screenshot. (Notice the ~$1,400 USD price without VAT.)_"

To me that means that although others had been told that UK dealers do not ship abroad you were testing the system because the web site had accepted your order. Sorry if I misread what the point of your post was. Quite happy to accept that I was being thick.

I suppose all you really mean is that the dealers in the UK are taking pre orders.


----------



## Music Alchemist

Triode User said:


> I suppose all you really mean is that the dealers in the UK are taking pre orders.



Yes, that's all I meant. hehe

But I also wanted to show the price when VAT is not included.

I believe most UK dealers selling online would let customers from the US and Canada order it on their website, travel to the UK, pick it up, and take it back. (Though this would probably end up costing more than simply buying it in America.)


----------



## dawktah2

Music Alchemist said:


> Yes, that's all I meant. hehe
> 
> But I also wanted to show the price when VAT is not included.
> 
> I believe most UK dealers selling online would let customers from the US and Canada order it on their website, travel to the UK, pick it up, and take it back. (Though this would probably end up costing more than simply buying it in America.)



...not unless you just so happen to need to go there on business; not me unfortunately...


----------



## jayz (Feb 1, 2018)

jayz said:


> Also, any update on Qutest reaching dealerships? As far as I can see, it is still not available to purchase in the UK.





Music Alchemist said:


> Plenty of people have preordered it, and you can too.



Available to pre order just means stock is due. Only when it arrives that it will become available to purchase which is what I wanted to know.


----------



## Music Alchemist

jayz said:


> Available to pre order just means stock is due. Only when it arrives that it will become available to purchase which is what I wanted to know.



Preorder = purchase. 

When you preorder something, you purchase it in advance, then receive it once they have it.


----------



## ra990 (Feb 8, 2018)

Sorry, wrong thread


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> Preorder = purchase.
> 
> When you preorder something, you purchase it in advance, then receive it once they have it.



When I pre order something that is not yet available I usually pay a deposit and do not pay in full until the item is ready for dispatch to me. 

Pre order does not equal purchase in advance in my books.


----------



## Music Alchemist (Feb 1, 2018)

Triode User said:


> When I pre order something that is not yet available I usually pay a deposit and do not pay in full until the item is ready for dispatch to me.
> 
> Pre order does not equal purchase in advance in my books.



When I preorder something that is not yet available, I usually pay in full before the item is ready for dispatch to me.

Preorder _does_ equal purchase in advance. That is the literal meaning of the word! If you don't believe me, feel free to consult Wikipedia or any dictionary.

Based on what I have seen, those who preordered the Qutest paid the full amount. I have seen online preorder forms with the full price as well.

In the past in the US, Chord products have been available for preorder for the full amount.


----------



## Triode User

Music Alchemist said:


> When I preorder something that is not yet available, I usually pay in full before the item is ready for dispatch to me.
> 
> Preorder _does_ equal purchase in advance. That is the literal meaning of the word! If you don't believe me, feel free to consult Wikipedia or any dictionary.
> 
> ...



This is a pointless discussion as we all (should) negotiate payment terms with our individual dealers. All I can say is that I have never paid in full for any Chord item that was not ready for immediate shipment or maybe available within a few days.


----------



## jayz

Triode User said:


> When I pre order something that is not yet available I usually pay a deposit and do not pay in full until the item is ready for dispatch to me.
> 
> Pre order does not equal purchase in advance in my books.



I agree. When item is available and ready for dispatch, it's not usually a pre order.

In any case the discussion is going tangential.  I just wanted to know whether dealers have received the goods at which point we will start to see reviews.


----------



## Music Alchemist

jayz said:


> I agree. When item is available and ready for dispatch, it's not usually a pre order.



_Of course_ it's not a preorder if it's already available for customers to receive it.

The very first definition of preorder on Google is: "order (an item of merchandise) before it is available, with the understanding that it will be shipped later."



jayz said:


> In any case the discussion is going tangential. I just wanted to know whether dealers have received the goods at which point we will start to see reviews.



It's just that you said it was not available for purchase, but, as I showed before, it had been for awhile. (At least online.)

It's also possible (and relatively commonplace) for shops to have an item but not sell or ship it yet.

So what you really want to know is when customers will be able to have it in their hands.


----------



## Music Alchemist

So The Cable Company increased the prices as they said they would:

https://www.thecableco.com/chord_electronics.html

However...there are other US dealers that have not:

https://www.moon-audio.com/electronics-brands/chord-electronics.html

We'll have to see whether the other dealers follow suit.


----------



## JWahl (Feb 3, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> So The Cable Company increased the prices as they said they would:
> 
> https://www.thecableco.com/chord_electronics.html
> 
> ...



It could be that some dealers are trying to clear stock that they have already purchased at the lower price, before raising prices to compensate for distributor price increases.

I'm just curious to know when U.S. dealers will open pre-orders for the Qutest.  Maybe they're still trying to negotiate retail prices for it.  I'm holding out hope for a pre-order discount, perhaps.


----------



## jwbrent

MarkF786 said:


> Thanks for the reply,  I never understood why Chord needs to implement such a drastic "fix", when so many other DACs don't.  With the Mojo, the only time the mute doesn't occur is if I let a whole album play track-to-track.  Otherwise:
> 
> - When I change albums it happens.
> - When I change tracks on an album it happens.
> ...



I’m with you here, Mark. I find the .5 second omission of the beginning of a track to be disconcerting, too. I’m also interested in the Qutest because I have a strong sense that it’s performace is going to be pretty special for the price. I use my AK240SS as my transport with a Mojo, so there’s no way to add a second to compensate for this uniqueness of the design.

I seem to recall Rob commenting way back that the muting is meant to eliminate any audible click because of a change in sampling frequency, or format.


----------



## jwbrent (Feb 4, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> So The Cable Company increased the prices as they said they would:
> 
> https://www.thecableco.com/chord_electronics.html
> 
> ...



I’m surprised by the $1,995 retail. I assumed, wrongly, that it would maintain the same price as the 2Qute, $1,795.


----------



## Music Alchemist

jwbrent said:


> I’m surprised by the $1,995 retail. I assumed, wrongly, that it would maintain the same price as the 2 Qute, $1,795.



If you go to the page, you can see that the US price is not determined yet.

https://www.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac.html


----------



## jwbrent (Feb 4, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> If you go to the page, you can see that the US price is not determined yet.
> 
> https://www.moon-audio.com/chord-qutest-dac.html



Ah, I didn’t look closely enough that Moon was estimating the likely selling price in the US. No matter, $200 won’t sway me from a purchase if it turns out to be as special as we all believe. With that said, if the price goes over 2K, then we’re encroaching on Hugo 2 territory.

I wonder if the absolute performance, setting aside the galvanic isolation, will be identical to the Hugo 2 even though it would appear to be a simpler design for those who don’t need headphone capability. Thoughts?


----------



## Music Alchemist

jwbrent said:


> Ah, I didn’t look closely enough that Moon was estimating the likely selling price in the US. No matter, $200 won’t sway me from a purchase if it turns out to be as special as we all believe. With that said, if the price goes over 2K, then we’re encroaching on Hugo 2 territory.



The UK price without VAT is ~$1,400. It would be nice if it was closer to $1,700 (which is roughly the UK price with VAT, though currency exchange rates fluctuate) in the US.



jwbrent said:


> I wonder if the absolute performance, setting aside the galvanic isolation, will be identical to the Hugo 2 even though it would appear to be a simpler design for those who don’t need a headphone capability. Thoughts?



As I mentioned before, general consensus is that the 2Qute sounds better than the Hugo. I'm guessing the Qutest would sound as good or better than the Hugo 2.


----------



## jwbrent

Music Alchemist said:


> As I mentioned before, general consensus is that the 2Qute sounds better than the Hugo. I'm guessing the Qutest would sound as good or better than the Hugo 2.



OK, glad to hear.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts 
I absolutely adore my 2qute, immensely, the only thing I don’t like about the new Qutest is the fact that I might not like it more than my 2qute, and that might be a disappointment. 
So with all things created perfectly equal (cables/source etc) in a A/B shoot out between my 2qute and the Qutest when I get it, in you honest opinion, what differences will I expect to hear, again in your honest opinion of course 
There’s and wonderful sound signature the 2qute has in my system, and I don’t want to lose that unless it’s better. But if I’m being honest, and I don’t want to think this way, I don’t think it’ll be better, just different. 
I’ve had both a Hugo and a Hugo 2 on my system, and 3 people including me when not know what we were hearing, all picked the 2qute as the better DAC, in my system of course. 
But my fingers are tightly crossed.


----------



## jayz (Feb 6, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> I’ve had both a Hugo and a Hugo 2 on my system, and 3 people including me when not know what we were hearing, all picked the 2qute as the better DAC, in my system of course.



Interesting. Can I ask WHY your preferred 2quite e.g. was it warmer and fuller sounding and/or you felt it sounded more detailed or was 2qute the better match for your system ?


----------



## Romi54

Skampmeister said:


> @Rob Watts
> I absolutely adore my 2qute, immensely, the only thing I don’t like about the new Qutest is the fact that I might not like it more than my 2qute, and that might be a disappointment.
> So with all things created perfectly equal (cables/source etc) in a A/B shoot out between my 2qute and the Qutest when I get it, in you honest opinion, what differences will I expect to hear, again in your honest opinion of course
> There’s and wonderful sound signature the 2qute has in my system, and I don’t want to lose that unless it’s better. But if I’m being honest, and I don’t want to think this way, I don’t think it’ll be better, just different.
> ...



I am in the same situation. Only the 2Qute is already sold. 

Well Rob Watts, how does the Qutest sound when compared to the 2Qute?


----------



## agedbest

...and what type of file you used for comparison
if we look the numbers only, Qutest is the winner
but not always,.. add numbers, add more details, .... some source don't sound better
so it is important to know the source, tipe of records,  you used for make your files


----------



## elviscaprice (Feb 6, 2018)

"Does the Qutest sound better than the 2Qute?"

This is silly.  Of course the Qutest will sound the best over the 2Qute (Chord decides to release an inferior DAC upgrade, NOT).  The real question is, is it worth the upgrade cost or would you be better served with another Chord DAC, now, or down the road, remaining content with the 2Qute for the time being?  I choose the 2Qute for the time being.
As far as comparing Hugo 2 to the 2Qute, you need to remember that the Hugo 2 is not galvanically isolated, if using a noisy source you need to have some kind of extra filtering, isolation, reclocking to compare.  If done properly, I am sure the Hugo 2 would trump the 2Qute.  Again, not worth the upgrade cost for the design I don't want.


----------



## agedbest

...oversampling is not always the right way
as usual here....we are entering in single, personal and habits of heard, where everything is true, and the exact opposite is also true.


----------



## elviscaprice (Feb 6, 2018)

"Should I upsample/filter my audio file before streaming to my Chord DAC?"

Upsampling before a Chord DAC is about the dumbest thing to do.  The internal Upsampling/filter built into the Chord DAC is far superior.  If your into Upsampling on a PC then there are other DAC's I would recommend, not Chord.    With that in mind, I choose Chord, forget the upsampling outside the DAC.  To date, you can't overcome the damage via high power PC upsampling/filtering to the data stream to match or exceed the Chord DAC internal upsampling/filtering.


----------



## agedbest

I agree with you.

...I will buy it and test it for 10 days in my system, and I will return it if I'm not happy with it, I will lose the return shipping cost only




elviscaprice said:


> "Should I upsample/filter my audio file before streaming to my Chord DAC?"
> 
> Upsampling before a Chord DAC is about the dumbest thing to do.  ... To date, you can't overcome the damage via high power PC upsampling/filtering to the data stream to match or exceed the Chord DAC internal upsampling/filtering.


----------



## Skampmeister

jayz said:


> Interesting. Can I ask WHY your preferred 2quite e.g. was it warmer and fuller sounding and/or you felt it sounded more detailed or was 2qute the better match for your system ?



It’s all in how the 2qute presents itself on my system. I’ll use an rainbow analogy, when you see a rainbow, you always see a smaller, dimmer one underneath, that’s the difference between the 2qute and the hugo’s. IMO my system likes not having all the other stuff hanging off the Hugo’s over the 2qutes simplicity. The 2qutes just got a bigger presence. 
I’m hoping to hear that same characteristic on the Qutest.


----------



## jayz (Feb 7, 2018)

elviscaprice said:


> "Should I upsample/filter my audio file before streaming to my Chord DAC?"
> 
> Upsampling before a Chord DAC is about the dumbest thing to do.  The internal Upsampling/filter built into the Chord DAC is far superior.



That's an interesting point, so does Qutest upsample all incoming data streams? To what frequency / bit depth ? Just asking because some DACs are promoted on such features but I see no mention of that for Chord DACs. As an example, NAD M51 upsamples all signals to 844kHz/32 bit PWM and that appears at the top of their feature list. I guess the next point is, if Qutest does upsample then then presumably when it is fed from an MScaler through dual BNCs, it would not up-sample then because MScaler will be a more capable upsampler?


----------



## Music Alchemist (Feb 7, 2018)

jayz said:


> That's an interesting point, so does Qutest upsample all incoming data streams? To what frequency / bit depth ? Just asking because some DACs are promoted on such features but I see no mention of that for Chord DACs.



I'm shocked you didn't know this. Extreme upsampling and very high tap lengths (which relate to the intricacy of the interpolation filter / reconstruction algorithm and time-domain precision) are one of the main selling points of Chord DACs. I'd suggest reading Rob Watts' posts and spending a few hours researching the company. The basic idea is that instead of merely reproducing the sampled data, they want to get closer to reproducing the original analog waveform. This requires enormously complex digital processing that is far beyond just upsampling. It's nothing like upsampling to a given sample rate in the way that a software program would. Even HQPlayer (which does upsampling and noise shaping reminiscent of Chord DACs) is not even remotely as advanced as what Chord does.


----------



## jayz (Feb 7, 2018)

Music Alchemist said:


> I'm shocked you didn't know this. Extreme upsampling and very high tap lengths (which relate to the intricacy of the interpolation filter / reconstruction algorithm and time-domain precision) are one of the main selling points of Chord DACs. I'd suggest reading Rob Watts' posts and spending a few hours researching the company. The basic idea is that instead of merely reproducing the sampled data, they want to get closer to reproducing the original analog waveform. This requires enormously complex digital processing that is far beyond just upsampling. It's nothing like upsampling to a given sample rate in the way that a software program would. Even HQPlayer (which does upsampling and noise shaping reminiscent of Chord DACs) is not even remotely as advanced as what Chord does.



Quite a straight forward question I would have thought - upsample to what frequency and bit depth in Qutest (or 2qute) ? 

Or is there no straight answer as in depends at which stage of processing we are talking about - in which case even rough figures might be good to know.

Also whether MScaler connection effectively bypasses some of this upscaling done internally in DAC?

Anyway, I am new to Chord DACs - shocking isn't it


----------



## Rob Watts

jayz said:


> Quite a straight forward question I would have thought - upsample to what frequency and bit depth in Qutest (or 2qute) ?
> 
> Or is there no straight answer as in depends at which stage of processing we are talking about - in which case even rough figures might be good to know.
> 
> ...



For Hugo 2/Qutest the signal path is:

1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue

When an M scaler is connected, the WTA1 filter is not used, and it is passed through to the 256 FS WTA 2 filter.

Bit depth is not important per se; what is important is that small signals are perfectly resolved, and to do this each OP of each filter is noise shaped to the appropriate bit depth for the next module; these truncation noise shapers are tested (by Verilog simulation) to ensure >350 dB THD and noise performance; each module must pass a -301 dB sine wave with perfect amplitude reproduction; this is done to ensure the perception of sound-stage depth reproduction, as minute amplitude errors - no matter how small - damages the perception of depth.

All other non chord DAC's don't bother (or physically can not) filter above 16FS; this filtering performance is essential to recover transients timing accuracy, and to ensure no jitter problems or noise floor modulation problems. The measurements shown earlier in this thread and the Hugo 2 thread show zero measurable noise floor modulation and zero source and master clock jitter aberrations; you could not get this level of measured performance without the extensive 2048 FS filtering, or the pulse array running at 104 MHz.

My previous posts in this and other threads (plus my blog Watts up?) covers the reasons for doing all this in much more detail!

Rob


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts no comment on my post directed at you at the top end of this page?


----------



## Triode User

Skampmeister said:


> @Rob Watts no comment on my post directed at you at the top end of this page?



Well, how to win friends and influence people perfectly demonstrated just there!


----------



## Skampmeister

Triode User said:


> Well, how to win friends and influence people perfectly demonstrated just there!



What on earth was wrong with what I asked?


----------



## jayz

Rob Watts said:


> For Hugo 2/Qutest the signal path is:
> 
> 1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue
> 
> ...



Thanks for that. I will indeed go back to your previous posts to get a better understanding. DSP fundamentals are a bit sketchy but simulation tech r&d of all shape & form is my day job so that might make up for that.


----------



## miketlse

jayz said:


> Thanks for that. I will indeed go back to your previous posts to get a better understanding. DSP fundamentals are a bit sketchy but simulation tech r&d of all shape & form is my day job so that might make up for that.


I think you have also to keep in mind the distinction between the mathematical theory, and how it is physically implemented in hardware.
All dacs are trying to use the theory that says that 16bits, 44.1 khz, is enough to capture all the information in a music signal.
From that start point, you get plenty of people who will then tell you that all dacs are trying to decode the same data, using the same communication theory, so will all sound the same.

They conveniently ignore the fact that the physical implementation:

chip dac, with a ground plane that is constantly fluctuating, and approx 16 taps
resistor dac, with manufacturing tolerances on how accurately you can create each resistor element
FPGA dac, with no ground plane issues, and many thousands of taps
greatly affects how closely a dac designer can achieve the theoretically perfect  decoding of the digital signal.


----------



## Rob Watts (Feb 8, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> @Rob Watts
> I absolutely adore my 2qute, immensely, the only thing I don’t like about the new Qutest is the fact that I might not like it more than my 2qute, and that might be a disappointment.
> So with all things created perfectly equal (cables/source etc) in a A/B shoot out between my 2qute and the Qutest when I get it, in you honest opinion, what differences will I expect to hear, again in your honest opinion of course
> There’s and wonderful sound signature the 2qute has in my system, and I don’t want to lose that unless it’s better. But if I’m being honest, and I don’t want to think this way, I don’t think it’ll be better, just different.
> ...





Skampmeister said:


> @Rob Watts no comment on my post directed at you at the top end of this page?



Because I can't comment on whether you will like something or not; only you can decide that. I can only state that Hugo 2 and Qutest is technically and measurement wise, sonically and musically much more advanced than Hugo 1 and 2 Qute.


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> For Hugo 2/Qutest the signal path is:
> 
> 1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue
> 
> ...



Thank you so much for posting on this thread. I am waiting anxiously to get my unit here in the US. I have listened to the Mojo and could hear a noticeable difference from my current DAC. As the Qutest is a better DAC than the Mojo, I believe my Qutest will give me many years of enjoyment.


----------



## Skampmeister

Rob Watts said:


> Because I can't comment on whether you will like something or not; only you can decide that. I can only state that Hugo 2 and Qutest is technically and measurement wise, sonically and musically much more advanced than Hugo 1 and 2 Qute.



Cheers, and thanks for your time to respond, looking forward to the Qutest hitting Australian shores.


----------



## plsvn

14 days since Future Shop listed the Qutest as available for purchase (in 7-10 days) so... anyone (in UK) has finally got one and cares to report, please?


----------



## jayz

plsvn said:


> 14 days since Future Shop listed the Qutest as available for purchase (in 7-10 days) so... anyone (in UK) has finally got one and cares to report, please?



Futureshop as of today also says "Usually ships within: 7 - 10 Days" so assuming another 1-2 days for delivery, we are talking almost another 2 weeks. Then it's Bristol Audio show time.

I am waiting till my local dealer says they've got stock. Cannot see how some dealers managed to get enough to sell and others didn't.


----------



## Triode User

jayz said:


> Futureshop as of today also says "Usually ships within: 7 - 10 Days" so assuming another 1-2 days for delivery, we are talking almost another 2 weeks. Then it's Bristol Audio show time.
> 
> I am waiting till my local dealer says they've got stock. Cannot see how some dealers managed to get enough to sell and others didn't.



Quite often in the first few weeks of sale for a popular item the dealers don’t actually have stock and they are merely fulfilling pre orders.


----------



## jayz

Triode User said:


> Quite often in the first few weeks of sale for a popular item the dealers don’t actually have stock and they are merely fulfilling pre orders.


 
Okay that makes sense. I don't like to pay full price and wait for weeks. That is why I might just wait till there is ample stock.


----------



## Triode User

jayz said:


> Okay that makes sense. I don't like to pay full price and wait for weeks. That is why I might just wait till there is ample stock.



As you are the uk why not pick the phone up to your favoured dealer and ask them if you can reserve one for a deposit. Or at least speak to a human being rather than just looking at web sites and assuming.


----------



## agedbest

seem to view the same isteria compulsive buy of an apple new item
an iphone or a qutest doesn't change life
seem other people think the same
other people like me are not in hurry, waiting the trial and a good price
that's wrong?


----------



## dmance (Feb 8, 2018)

post deleted...


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 8, 2018)

agedbest said:


> seem to view the same isteria compulsive buy of an apple new item
> an iphone or a qutest doesn't change life
> seem other people think the same
> other people like me are not in hurry, waiting the trial and a good price
> that's wrong?



I'm building a wine and listening room and the set up has no DAC. Chord has a solid reputation so trial? Nothing gimmicky like a phone, it will do one thing convert music. To me once you get into this price range, good price is relative...


----------



## jayz (Feb 9, 2018)

agedbest said:


> seem to view the same isteria compulsive buy of an apple new item
> an iphone or a qutest doesn't change life
> seem other people think the same
> other people like me are not in hurry, waiting the trial and a good price
> that's wrong?



Can't go wrong with that attitude but you see, people make choices based on personal circumstances and preferences so it is very difficult to generalise.

In my case I have decided to buy right away for several reasons:

* Was going to get an exdem 2qute last December but held back on hearing rumours of a new version

* In rare cases with package damage, we might see discounts but other than that, Qutest ex-dems  will be some way out

* I usually go exdem with hifi but happy to pay full price for exceptional equipment/companies/individuals. The fact that Rob replies on this forum and explains things itself is a reason enough

* Qutest seems to be future proof especially considering the potential for future MScalers so this is most likely a keeper

* In the unlikely event it does not suit, I just return back within eval period or even later, recoup 80% cost back would be a win in hifi IMO

Can go on and on but whats the point? Most of it is very individual ...


----------



## aspro

jayz said:


> Can't go wrong with that attitude but you see, people make choices based on personal circumstances and preferences so it is very difficult to generalise.
> 
> In my case I have decided to buy right away for several reasons:
> 
> ...



I have a 2Qute (which replaced an original Hugo) in my main system which I like very much.  I also have a Mojopoly as the source for a pair of Genelec active studio monitors in another room.  This also sounds great but has some well documented teething problems(occasional drop-outs in my case) which Chord are sorting as we type.

In the main system the 2Qute is fed by an Auralic Aries Mini which has a user fit 750GB SSD HDD.  This has an integral DAC which obviously I don't use.  The Aries Mini also acts as server for the Mojopoly and other ystems (Naim and Sonos).  It's a very neat solution as I don't need a NAS.

John Franks intimated on the Poly Head-fi thread that Chord would roll out a desktop version of the Poly when  the dust had settled (could be a while yet!).  Presumably this will have a user fit HDD instead of an SD card reader.

What puts me off buying a Qutest is that Chord might bring out a desktop version of the Poly but with an integral DAC thus making a Qutest redundant.  Could Rob Watts or John Franks indicate that this is not planned.

To be fair the Chord website does say the Qutest has 'high-resolution dual-data digital _inputs_ for connection to future Chord Electronics products' which implies the desktop Poly(Homopoly?) will be a streamer only.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 9, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> I'm building a wine and listening room and the set up has no DAC. Chord has a solid reputation so trial? Nothing gimmicky like a phone, it will do one thing convert music. To me once you get into this price range, good price is relative...



everyone has their own needs ....happy to hear you have no doubt

I'm waiting for a test instead
I'm curious to see if finally this new DAC has not the problems of the previous models.
as for the Qute HD, Qute2, and also for the new Qutest, Rob Watts has stated that it does not need an external LPS ... google it, if you do not believe me.
to my specific question Rob answers vaguely (see in this Jan 16, 2018 at 11:48 AM Post # 254, a few weeks ago). so even Rob Watts is not 100% sure.

the new Qutest may look very interesting. now it needs 5V for power, but what i really do not like is the micro USB connector used for power it. You can find a lot of mobiles not charged because of damaged connector or bad contacts. so I do not think it is an appropriate choice, when used only for power (no data) and there are no space problems.

No USB-battery (powerbank) is really linear voltage. there is no 5V battery, all of those powerbanks use an internal 3.7 volt battery and switching DC / DC converting circuitry, a really good LPS will be the best choice if needed. so I will not use a powerbank for a system not plan to be mobile.

if, to get the most out of this DAC, you must also add the cost of an external LPS, the budget must be increased by 2/3 hundred dollars or more, depends on the system adopted ...I do not find this interesting at all, certainly it is not interesting for anyone's wallet.

so i wait and will see....


----------



## dmance

@Rob Watts 
I am debating between Hugo2/Qutest and its all about the Qutest control of volume via software attenuated 32-bit USB input -vs- Dave/Hugo2 internal volume control. I was hoping that JRivers' reasonable effort at TPDF noise shaping of its internal 64-bit processing would be close to your internal noise shaped volume implementation.  Especially if the data is passed to Qutest as 32-bit USB samples.  I'd appreciate any comments, thanks.


----------



## jayz (Feb 9, 2018)

aspro said:


> I have a 2Qute (which replaced an original Hugo) in my main system which I like very much.  I also have a Mojopoly as the source for a pair of Genelec active studio monitors in another room.  This also sounds great but has some well documented teething problems(occasional drop-outs in my case) which Chord are sorting as we type.
> 
> In the main system the 2Qute is fed by an Auralic Aries Mini which has a user fit 750GB SSD HDD.  This has an integral DAC which obviously I don't use.  The Aries Mini also acts as server for the Mojopoly and other ystems (Naim and Sonos).  It's a very neat solution as I don't need a NAS.
> 
> ...




I think we are running the risk of going out of topic but since we don't have any other Qutest specific updates it might be okay...

Anyway, in the past, I have looked at Auralic Aries Femto as an upgrade to my current source (which can only do 24/96 PCM and no DSD) but decided to hold back. I am glad I did because with all the DPLL & noise filtering tech Rob's put into Qutest, I don't think it would have made a difference.

Interesting you mention a desktop version of poly but I think it is more likely a desktop digital player with an SD Card reader. I think an internal HDD might not be in the same league of ultra-low noise Chord DAC enclosures we have today. And if you ask me, I don't think a DAC will come integrated - that will be an overlap. All speculation of course but to me, it has some logic. The interesting bit is where Chord decides to go with their MScaler tech. Currently it comes with Blu2 but can you imagine if they did a desktop player with an integrated MScaler, that would totally disrupt the digital player market out there - as you say, such a streamer can connect to Qutest with dual coax and we have an end-game setup right there.


----------



## Rob Watts

dmance said:


> @Rob Watts
> I am debating between Hugo2/Qutest and its all about the Qutest control of volume via software attenuated 32-bit USB input -vs- Dave/Hugo2 internal volume control. I was hoping that JRivers' reasonable effort at TPDF noise shaping of its internal 64-bit processing would be close to your internal noise shaped volume implementation.  Especially if the data is passed to Qutest as 32-bit USB samples.  I'd appreciate any comments, thanks.



It will not be quite as good; when designing Blu 2's OP truncators, I had the 768 kHz noise shapers (guaranteeing 350 dB performance so maintaining the original precision), gaussian dither and TPDF dither; TPDF had the worst sound quality with a reduction in depth. Gaussian gave closer to the noise shaper performance (about half way). So there are for sure (small but audible) transparency losses involved in TPDF. The Gaussian was pseudo; I am hoping a better Gaussian will improve transparency further - this is important for Davina project when I need 16 bit 44.1. Hugo 2 uses the same 768 kHz noise shapers for truncation. Having said all that, I suspect that software volume would be more transparent than an analogue volume control though.


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 9, 2018)

agedbest said:


> everyone has their own needs ....happy to hear you have no doubt
> 
> I'm waiting for a test instead
> I'm curious to see if finally this new DAC has not the problems of the previous models.
> ...






it may not be of interest to you but this thing is a pretty superb state of the art machined block.
the 5v usb external a great idea.







i am not a fan of micro usb but as this is a static object  without battery  i think  the choice has set free and opened up many  options.
the unit seems very robust nothing fiddly it  can handle many of the nasty and more refined options cheap 5 dollar usb  battery  big higher spec anker block usb battery and my favorite by far the
uptone audio ultracap lps 1   set to 5v.
simply stunning combination kind o spooky at first  i would imagine the paul hynes sr4  power supply   at 5v will be a sweet option as well.

this thing took seconds to set up then again i play cd i  used toslink  i connected to 35 year old sony esprit  cd and later sony and theta cd players from the 1990s using coax or vintage video bnc cables every option good or bad the unit handled.
 they say cd is dead it certainly lives with this franks and watts device  absolute  gem.
i never liked cd never thought the information existed in the polycarbonate matrix it turns out sony and phillips had put it in all those years ago, chord have made what looks like a slab of granite from the movie 2001 and put an hal 9000 inside.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 9, 2018)

tony wilson said:


> ...i am not a fan of micro usb but ..... and my favorite by far the uptone audio ultracap lps 1   set to 5v.
> simply stunning combination kind o spooky at first  i would imagine the paul hynes sr4  power supply   at 5v will be a sweet option as well.....





thank you for share....



as told in my recent post LPS it is not cheaper
if you must add to the system an UltraCap™ LPS-1 $ 395.00
this will be my choise too...but it would be preferable if it were not necessary


----------



## miketlse

tony wilson said:


> it may not be of interest to you but this thing is a pretty superb state of the art machined block.
> the 5v usb external a great idea.
> 
> 
> ...


Was this a demo at a dealers, or are you the first owner to post on this thread?


----------



## dawktah2

tony wilson said:


> it may not be of interest to you but this thing is a pretty superb state of the art machined block.
> the 5v usb external a great idea.
> 
> 
> ...



Were there pictures in that post?


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 9, 2018)

agedbest said:


> thank you for share....
> 
> 
> 
> ...






my friend i tested it it sounded great with a 5 dollar emergency usb charger battery thing.
a heavy duty anker usb  battery  would probably last days.
i already had uptone audio ultra cap which is  a superb combo
  i will have a paul hynes sr4  power supply next week is it needed no but these products can be used for years usb 5v is not going anywhere also both power supply can do different voltage

why the investment because i had an idea that this would maybe be a mojo  big brother   without the battery inside a heavier  stable block a great looking piece
super cool running.
my mojo kept floating in the air with the heavy duty cable connecting into a hi fi table system
 in the past  i have had  theta and mark levinson made dac boxes 2 ft across weight 15 kg.
the power of this chord tiny slab is something else

for me this was easier to set up than a mojo  and as i said it seems to tolerate lots variables in connections basic and posh power supplies.
i have a brand new unit  in my home  apart from a mojo everything else i have  is vintage gear.
i am imagine the technology leap in the 3 years of mojo have allowed the lowering of voltage into the 5v region.
i was tempted by the combination of 2cute with different power supply  options but what i have is all the dac  power i will need  for a long time to come.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 10, 2018)

that's why a powerbank (USB power storage) can not be used for best output performance.....
all the powerbanks on the market use an internal battery of different amperage (capacity), but with same voltage of 3.7v, then by a switching DC / DC converting circuitry,
without any filter, it exit at 5V. any converting makes interference, definitively powerbank is NOT the solution. regardless of the quality, brand, appearance, cost, etc., etc.

*Technical Issues*

*Power Supplies for Audio*
Powering an electronic circuit is a complex issue. Signal processing circuits vary in their ability to reject interference from supply voltage fluctuations. This ability is measurable and is called the power supply rejection ratio (PSRR). Any interference on the power supply output will be passed into the electronic circuit, at a reduced level, governed by the PSRR of the circuit. For example, if the PSRR is 20 dB, the amplitude of the interference will be 10 times lower than the power supply fluctuation itself (40dB is 100 times lower, 60dB is 1,000 times lower, 80dB is 10,000 times lower and 100dB is 100,000 times lower). Different signal circuit topologies have different PSRR's which can be quite low particularly at high frequencies. When power supply interference mixes with the signal, it masks low-level information and causes inter-modulation with the signal. This destroys the integrity of the music signal. For the highest performance from audio electronics, great care is required in the design of the power supplies to minimise power supply induced problems.
*
The Ideal*
To ensure no interaction with the powered circuit, an ideal power supply, should have no output voltage fluctuations under any load conditions, which means that the output impedance should be zero at all frequencies of operation. You can't generate a voltage across zero impedance. Also, it should not allow interference to break through from other sources like the supply line, such as rectifier diode switching, digital clocking and radio frequency interference (RFI) etc via the mains supply. This implies that the power supply should have infinite PSRR of its own power source.
*
The Practical*
Unfortunately, due to the limits of the various power supply design options available, power supply interaction will occur. The level of interaction is governed by the ability of the power supply to approach the ideal performance of zero output impedance, and infinite supply rejection of it's power source, at all frequencies of operation. It is logical to conclude that the better the power supply performance in these areas, the better the audio performance. Practical application proves this to be true.

Any regulator design worthy of consideration in high performance audio systems must offer a low output impedance over a very wide bandwidth (much wider than the audio bandwidth to deal with digital and RF interference). It should also have a high slew rate, fast rise-time and fast settling time to control the regulator output voltage during fast varying load current transients. It should be noticeably faster than the circuit to be powered to avoid load induced output fluctuations. It should also be quiet enough not to compromise the noise performance of the audio circuits it powers.


----------



## kelly200269

tony wilson said:


> they say cd is dead it certainly lives with this franks and watts device  absolute  gem.
> i never liked cd never thought the information existed in the polycarbonate matrix it turns out sony and phillips had put it in all those years ago, chord have made what looks like a slab of granite from the movie 2001 and put an hal 9000 inside.


I'm still a 'generation' behind, with my Hugo for potable use and 2Qute in my home system. And yes, I agree completely that Rob & John have done more than anyone in the last generation (IMO) to make CD 16/44 sound like music. I could never really 'get on' with CD prior to getting my Hugo, but their DACs have injected new life into my CD collection. I now realise that all along, the 'software' was fine, it was just the DACs that sucked!
I'm tempted (an understatement!) by the Qutest. I just wonder how much better it would be compared to my 2Qute?


----------



## aspro

jayz said:


> I think we are running the risk of going out of topic but since we don't have any other Qutest specific updates it might be okay...
> 
> Anyway, in the past, I have looked at Auralic Aries Femto as an upgrade to my current source (which can only do 24/96 PCM and no DSD) but decided to hold back. I am glad I did because with all the DPLL & noise filtering tech Rob's put into Qutest, I don't think it would have made a difference.
> 
> Interesting you mention a desktop version of poly but I think it is more likely a desktop digital player with an SD Card reader. I think an internal HDD might not be in the same league of ultra-low noise Chord DAC enclosures we have today. And if you ask me, I don't think a DAC will come integrated - that will be an overlap. All speculation of course but to me, it has some logic. The interesting bit is where Chord decides to go with their MScaler tech. Currently it comes with Blu2 but can you imagine if they did a desktop player with an integrated MScaler, that would totally disrupt the digital player market out there - as you say, such a streamer can connect to Qutest with dual coax and we have an end-game setup right there.



If I'd bought a 2Qute recently I'd be pretty fed up.  Chord have produced something which looks to be much better in the same price bracket and reduced the price and presumably the second hand value of my 2Qute.

 In the same vein if Chord in the fairly near future produced a desktop Poly with integral Qutest at, say £1500,  I'd be regreting an early Qutest purchase so it's very much on topic for me.  It would be nice for Chord to confirm that they have no plans for a desktop Poly/Qutest combo.

As to whether a prospective desktop Poly (with or without Qutest) should have a HDD drive or SD reader why not have both and live up to its name (maybe change it to Omni).  For me the current capacity and price of SD cards would be a big limitation for my whole domestic music collection.  As for noise on HDD Auralic include the facility on their c.£4K Aries G2 streamer so presumaby they don't think it's problematic.  Don't a lot of people have NAS drives with HDDs using switch mode PSUs wired into their systems?  This is why I like my Aries Mini setup with a solid state drive with a high quality linear PSU. No NAS or switch mode PSUs in my system at all.

I find the power supply issue fascinating.  Nearly all decent hi-fi companues avoid switch mode power supplies.  Robin Watts is surely a genius if he can isolate his designs from their deleterious effects.  I find his posts utterly comvincing even though I generally don't understand a word of them!


----------



## theveterans (Feb 10, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> It will not be quite as good; when designing Blu 2's OP truncators, I had the 768 kHz noise shapers (guaranteeing 350 dB performance so maintaining the original precision), gaussian dither and TPDF dither; TPDF had the worst sound quality with a reduction in depth. Gaussian gave closer to the noise shaper performance (about half way). So there are for sure (small but audible) transparency losses involved in TPDF. The Gaussian was pseudo; I am hoping a better Gaussian will improve transparency further - this is important for Davina project when I need 16 bit 44.1. Hugo 2 uses the same 768 kHz noise shapers for truncation. Having said all that, I suspect that software volume would be more transparent than an analogue volume control though.



Would a resistor relayed step attenuator mitigate the loss of transparency in volume? For instance, a passive preamp with just pure resistor relayed step attenuator (100 dB steps) in the analogue path to control the volume after the 3V output from Qutest

I imagine that would be more transparent than digital software volume though


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 10, 2018)

that's why a powerbank (USB power storage) can not be used for best output performance.....quote

well good luck with your system
what is best can it be easily defined or heard maybe anyway switching power wall warts whatever they are called do not float my boat all the great comapanies use them and i am sure they tick many boxes for them.
the best i would imagine will be uptone audio ultacap  and paul hynes power supply followed by the ebay £200 regulated ones down to the china £30-40 pound  ones
a heavy duty  usb battery like the anker i am using sure sounds sweet to my ears it is true it sounds sluggish when compared to the ultracap .

cutest  does not seem power hungry at all  the mojo seemed a little greedy playing while charging it struggled sometimes was it a 7 or 8 v battery inside charging via a low mah 5v?
i was going to buy a 2cute after reading about different tweak options  but i looked at the time cycle and guessed that something would be coming  sooner or later.
a slab of black  and no internal battery low voltage cool running cd living playing  sweetness.
cd maybe low fi  but sounds hi to me


----------



## dawktah2

tony wilson said:


> that's why a powerbank (USB power storage) can not be used for best output performance.....quote
> 
> well good luck with your system
> what is best can it be easily defined or heard maybe anyway switching power wall warts whatever they are called do not float my boat all the great comapanies use them and i am sure they tick many boxes for them.
> ...



Pictures? No pics didn't happen


----------



## Music Alchemist

theveterans said:


> Would a resistor relayed step attenuator mitigate the loss of transparency in volume? For instance, a passive preamp with just pure resistor relayed step attenuator (100 dB steps) in the analogue path to control the volume after the 3V output from Qutest
> 
> I imagine that would be more transparent than digital software volume though



I did not hear a difference with or without my Schiit SYS passive preamp with the Mojo. (Aside from the soft scratching sound the cheap potentiometer in my preamp makes, which you don't have to worry about.) Since you have a Mojo and Saga, you could try with and without the Saga to see if you hear a difference.


----------



## agedbest

tony wilson said:


> that's why a powerbank (USB power storage) can not be used for best output performance.....quote
> 
> ....a heavy duty  usb battery like the anker i am using sure sounds sweet to my ears it is true it sounds sluggish when compared to the ultracap .







well....if this is true  we can desume that also the new Chord DAC Qutest NEEDS an external LPS for best output performance
as for his predecessors


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 10, 2018)

agedbest said:


> well....if this is true  we can desume that also the new Chord DAC Qutest NEEDS an external LPS for best output performance
> as for his predecessors


well
if what is true ?

i was in such a rush to test i have not even seen the provided supply   until 10 mins ago
the box it all comes in is very fine quality  it has a little draw which i never noticed before  i am now using  the 5v supplied  supply the cutest has been on all day using usb battery  and mainly uptone audio ultra cap
i am now using the the chord inclosed supply.
have the music cranked up this thing is a stunning.

a lot of people on the 2cute pages had issues with the voltage output  i believe this has variable voltage i have not figured the the sequence yet  but it is fine my vintage theta dac outputs 7v which is pretty crazy.


i see audio  cables power supply part of personalisation  i understand companies concerns  as  when it goes wrong someone has to repair the unit.
with the provided power supply it is sounding great.
where i am getting changes is the cd choice sony cdp 5000es,sony cdp 333es and the theta which uses panasonic stable platter so far funny enough the sony cdp333es which i think is from  the late 1980s ish  sounds superb it is now resolving so much detail.


----------



## miketlse

I did consider the 2Qute, but was put off by the 3V output. 
I opted for the Hugo 2 instead.
Since then I have listened to many CDs using the Hugo 2, and find that the Hugo 2 works wonders with RDCD files.
I anticipate the same magical music experiences will be available with the Qutest, so it will be interesting to hear the user feedback.


----------



## agedbest

tony wilson said:


> well
> if what is true ?



for now you are the only one to have tried it, and posted here ...

I think it should be clear what I was talking about ...
since the statement is yours: "..a heavy duty usb battery like the anker i am sure sure sounds to my ears it is true it sounds sluggish when compared to the ultracap."
so my reply was :"new Chord DAC Qutest NEEDS an external LPS for best output performance as for his predecessors"


but I think and hope we'll see a lot more soon


----------



## tony wilson

agedbest said:


> for now you are the only one to have tried it, and posted here ...
> 
> I think it should be clear what I was talking about ...
> since the statement is yours: "..a heavy duty usb battery like the anker i am sure sure sounds to my ears it is true it sounds sluggish when compared to the ultracap."
> ...


----------



## Rob Watts

theveterans said:


> Would a resistor relayed step attenuator mitigate the loss of transparency in volume? For instance, a passive preamp with just pure resistor relayed step attenuator (100 dB steps) in the analogue path to control the volume after the 3V output from Qutest
> 
> I imagine that would be more transparent than digital software volume though



The problem with passive volume controls - such as a relay and discrete resistors - are that the switch contacts, the solder joints, and if you are using leaded resistors the internal connection from the pressure end caps to the metal film - all add small signal non-linearities due to oxides and impurities. These small signal distortions affect depth perception and detail resolution. 

So does that mean digital volume controls are better? No not with conventional digital; the DAC's themselves are poor at small signals - R2R are horribly non linear, and conventional delta sigma has poor small signal performance with only 140 dB (at best) noise shaper resolution. DSD is even worse at -120 dB (DSD 64). That is why I go to the trouble of ensuring that all my digital paths are capable of resolving a -301 dB signal perfectly, so that small signals and depth cues are properly resolved.


----------



## theveterans (Feb 11, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> The problem with passive volume controls - such as a relay and discrete resistors - are that the switch contacts, the solder joints, and if you are using leaded resistors the internal connection from the pressure end caps to the metal film - all add small signal non-linearities due to oxides and impurities. These small signal distortions affect depth perception and detail resolution.
> 
> So does that mean digital volume controls are better? No not with conventional digital; the DAC's themselves are poor at small signals - R2R are horribly non linear, and conventional delta sigma has poor small signal performance with only 140 dB (at best) noise shaper resolution. DSD is even worse at -120 dB (DSD 64). That is why I go to the trouble of ensuring that all my digital paths are capable of resolving a -301 dB signal perfectly, so that small signals and depth cues are properly resolved.



Thank you for your reply Rob Watts.

I'll just ask some questions to understand your implementation regarding volume control fully without loss in transparency:

With the -301dB dynamic range in the digital domain, you would simply change the "reference to some -dB from zero dB" in the digital domain to change volume and maintain 100% transparency correct? However if I am going to do this on a conventional DAC, it would result to bit reduction and therefore loss in transparency?

Speaking with Qutest, attaching an analogue preamp of any kind (be it motorized alps potentiometer, stepped relay resistors, etc.) will result to some loss in transparency however minute that loss is, but with Qutest directly connected to power amp and software controlling the volume using any OS (i.e. Windows, OS X, Android and iOS) would not result to loss in transparency correct?


----------



## Rob Watts

It's not an issue of bit reduction per se that's important; it is the loss of resolution in the audio bandwidth that is important. Any change to a digital signal will involve added distortion and noise; what I can do is to implement the volume function with minimal change in distortion and noise (it's below -350dB) and this level of performance will mean that depth information is preserved. But to do this you need to employ very aggressive noise shaping and run the volume control at a minimum SR of 705/768 kHz - and that is how volume is implemented in Hugo 2. Now a software implemented volume will for sure add distortion and noise and will have the audible consequence of degrading the perception of depth and detail resolution; but I suspect this audible loss will be small compared to the loss in depth you get with an analogue volume control in the path.


----------



## musicday

Richer Sounds started to carry the Chord Quest along with the Mojo.
Best to call them in your town for avability.


----------



## dmance

Finally! A first impression post from Pink Fish Media ...
http://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/chord-qutest-has-landed.211981/


----------



## agedbest

dmance said:


> Finally! A first impression post from Pink Fish Media ...
> http://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/chord-qutest-has-landed.211981/




thanks at last something interesting

I was a bit stunned by the reviewer's statements and comments

especially this: "Interestingly (I guess) the best I heard from the Qutest came when I wound up HQPlayer to DSD512 and fired bits at the Qutest at 22megabits per second - which goes completely against the official guidance from Chord/Watts. Maybe Rob would explain that I need the MScaler and a million taps instead."


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 13, 2018)

Another video posted, not much about sound.


----------



## musicday (Feb 13, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> Another video posted, not much about sound.



Thank you for the link.I am looking forward to see and hear more about the Qutest.


----------



## maxh22

I enjoyed the video, beautiful packaging if you ask me. Packaging looks much more refined than the original Hugo 2 box, does anyone know if they updated the Hugo 2 box?


----------



## agedbest (Feb 13, 2018)

nothing more than a box???

thanks for sharing


----------



## agedbest

serial number 34357.....looking for a complete review soon


----------



## miketlse

agedbest said:


> serial number 34357.....looking for a complete review soon


Looks like they are not starting with serial number 00001 then.


----------



## Deftone

Music Alchemist said:


> More glamor shots.



I prefer this aggressive, muscled up with sharp angles design from chord much more than the curves of previous design. Definitely more mature and serious looking. Good work John.


----------



## elviscaprice (Feb 13, 2018)

agedbest said:


> thanks at last something interesting
> 
> I was a bit stunned by the reviewer's statements and comments
> 
> especially this: "Interestingly (I guess) the best I heard from the Qutest came when I wound up HQPlayer to DSD512 and fired bits at the Qutest at 22megabits per second - which goes completely against the official guidance from Chord/Watts. Maybe Rob would explain that I need the MScaler and a million taps instead."


I wouldn't put much into this.  There is no doubt that the source quality in clocking and power still matters when streaming to the Qutest, regardless of G.I..  Thus the reviewer was streaming from a noisy source to begin with, probably the same computer they used to upsample with HQP.  Basically it says nothing, and if one was to use a lower power PC with good clocking and power, it would blow away the HQP upsampling/filtering, in bit perfect streaming, with a Chord DAC.


----------



## Danny86

At the same time though, it was the same (noisy or not) computer used to stream both the standard and upsampled content. 
In theory, when the content is upsampled the computer gets even noisier. So hearing a better(I know this is subjective) result is even more curious. 

Last but not least I doubt that someone who builds DACs from kits would be unable to optimize a computer for audio (Linux was mentioned so already a good sign). 



elviscaprice said:


> I wouldn't put much into this.  There is no doubt that the source quality in clocking and power still matters when streaming to the Qutest, regardless of G.I..  Thus the reviewer was streaming from a noisy source to begin with, probably the same computer they used to upsample with HQP.  Basically it says nothing, and if one was to use a lower power PC with good clocking and power, it would blow away the HQP upsampling/filtering, in bit perfect streaming, with a Chord DAC.


----------



## daredevil_kk (Feb 14, 2018)

Mine just arrived at the shop, but l’m not free to collect it till next Wed.


I’ll post up a review once I have it up and running in my system.

Cheers,
KK


----------



## jayz (Feb 14, 2018)

Proly not seen a DAC connected up quite like this. I just don't like to hear analog cable so Qutest feeds directly into my active speakers.










Figured I won't have time to experiment with power supplies and also I am unaware how vulnerable the rest of my system is to noise so therefore, Qutest is being powered from an iFi iPower 5v rather than stock supply. And I expect it will be a while before any critical listening can be done but meantime, it will hopefully get around 40 hours burn-in this week alone. I am new to Chord so unfortunately will be unable to compare against other Chord DACs. Initial impressions are positive. Tried to gather a few words from the audiophile vocabulary to sum up but suffice to say at this point that overall finesse and articulation remain unhurt but whatever I played sounded nicer - as if instruments got upgraded/oiled up and vocals had more emotion . Have to say I have done the Linn journey all the way to all-aktiv but never quite enjoyed the end result because it has always been a sacrifice of transparency. PRAT, I think I am going to keep you this time...


----------



## JWahl (Feb 14, 2018)

In regards to power supply options, when I'm able to buy the Qutest, I'm considering pairing it with the iFi nano iUsb.  It seems like it could be a good value since it can feed cleaner USB signals and provide 5V USB power via the second output.  It may even be a little overkill.

I've already traded down from my more expensive amp to free up funds for the Qutest.  I'm just waiting for the official U.S release before I put my Mojo and Elear up for sale.

It might seem a little odd using the Qutest with a much cheaper amp (in my Sig now), but using the new amp with the Mojo, I feel like it's plenty transparent to source.  I usually try to prioritize source quality over amp anyways.


----------



## elviscaprice (Feb 14, 2018)

never mind


----------



## dawktah2

dawktah2 said:


> Another video posted, not much about sound.




Just watched his updated video of demo tracks.  Isn't this useless since the sound quality is only has good as what your system can get through Youtube?


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> Just watched his updated video of demo tracks.  Isn't this useless since the sound quality is only has good as what your system can get through Youtube?


I haven't watched this video, but many demo videos are potentially misleading, in that the sound is recorded via a phone mike>converted to digital by the phone ADC>maybe converted further to a youtube compatible format> then when played back by phone/laptop/tablet, there is a further conversion by DAC, and potentially playback via crappy phone/tablet speakers.
All these opportunities to degrade the original source music signature, are conveniently forgotten, by the original enthusiast who recorded the video.


----------



## hifipassion (Feb 15, 2018)

Looking forward to own such a product.
However, I pay attention to small details and I'm confused about one thing.
This information was not included in the initial announcement (on this site) and I saw it added later in the Chord website:
Does the Qutest have a *Class A output stage *?
@Rob Watts : Could you please clarify this information for me ?


----------



## ra990

Please excuse my ignorance on this, but I don't get the whole aftermarket power supply thing. Does it really make an audible difference? Plus, hasn't the designer already stated that the included power supply is all that's needed and anything else actually voids warranty (that might have been for the 2Qute only)? Why would the product not include an optimal power supply at this price?


----------



## Skampmeister

ra990 said:


> Please excuse my ignorance on this, but I don't get the whole aftermarket power supply thing. Does it really make an audible difference? Plus, hasn't the designer already stated that the included power supply is all that's needed and anything else actually voids warranty (that might have been for the 2Qute only)? Why would the product not include an optimal power supply at this price?



Funny isn’t it, Rob gets so much praise for what he does, deserving of course, but is ignored when he goes against the grain when he says to not waste money on a belief system (not exactly his words, but you get my point)
Me, if he says it’s not needed, it’s not needed.


----------



## Cloten

Though I've been complaining on the Chord Poly thread, I thought I'd drop in my first impressions of the Qutest, which arrived yesterday. I'd previously been using a Chord Mojo in my hifi system, and the comparisons are with that: the bass is fuller and more precise, the instrument separation is extraordinarily good, and the timing and articulacy are extraordinary. The sound of violins, in particular, is as real as anything I've heard from an artifical musical reproduction system. Highly, highly recommended. Of course, this may just be initial enthusiasm, but it really is a joy. The only criticism I have is that it doesn't have an 'off' switch.


----------



## Skampmeister

My 2qute has been on nearly 24/7 for two years, being on all the time doesn’t hurt them at all.


----------



## miketlse

ra990 said:


> Please excuse my ignorance on this, but I don't get the whole aftermarket power supply thing. Does it really make an audible difference? Plus, hasn't the designer already stated that the included power supply is all that's needed and anything else actually voids warranty (that might have been for the 2Qute only)? Why would the product not include an optimal power supply at this price?


This type of question gets repeatedly raised on several of the chord threads.
I will always trust the view/opinion of Rob Watts, largely because he has a CV with 30 years of designing/coding electronic devices, and in recent years winning awards for his DAC designs.
However there are quite a few owners of Chord Dacs, who say that Rob is wrong, and that using a different external power supply produces a 'night and day' difference in the sound quality.
So you have two diametrically opposed views, and 'neer the twain shall meet'.
Asking for advice about power supplies on a chord thread can end up confusing. The best advice is that it is your money, and that if you first demo an alternative power supply, at least you can then make an informed decision, and keep/return the power supply as necessary.


----------



## Skampmeister

As Rob mentioned earlier, whack a power brick onto the Qutest and go from there. Better still, ask someone else to do it for you at some point in time and see if you can tell when it has been done without your knowledge.


----------



## Triode User

Cloten said:


> Though I've been complaining on the Chord Poly thread, I thought I'd drop in my first impressions of the Qutest, which arrived yesterday. I'd previously been using a Chord Mojo in my hifi system, and the comparisons are with that: the bass is fuller and more precise, the instrument separation is extraordinarily good, and the timing and articulacy are extraordinary. The sound of violins, in particular, is as real as anything I've heard from an artifical musical reproduction system. Highly, highly recommended. Of course, this may just be initial enthusiasm, but it really is a joy. The only criticism I have is that it doesn't have an 'off' switch.



Great that you are enjoying it. I never turn my Dave off.


----------



## hifipassion (Feb 15, 2018)

ra990 said:


> Please excuse my ignorance on this, but I don't get the whole aftermarket power supply thing. Does it really make an audible difference? Plus, hasn't the designer already stated that the included power supply is all that's needed and anything else actually voids warranty (that might have been for the 2Qute only)? Why would the product not include an optimal power supply at this price?



As a 2Qute owner, I can state that a low-noise linear power supply (LPS) is definitely better than the included one.
It takes an educated ear and a decent system including good cabling. One will notice it right away.
And, as an advantage, you could turn the 2Qute on/off using the switch on the LPS


----------



## dmance

hifipassion said:


> As a 2Qute owner, I can state that a low-noise linear power supply (LPS) is definitely better than the included ..


As a former 2Qute owner, I went to a Teddy Pardo PSU despite the many posts by Rob Watts that it would make no difference.  But it did, and it was not subtle.  So I (regrettably) put Rob onto the ''emperor has no clothes' mindset.  
But 18months later, I now believe (as Rob Watts indicated) that it was the AC mains noise induced by the factory PSU affected my amplifier.

So I now, apologetically, admit that the 2Qute outputs are probably identical with factory or aftermarket PSU.  The audio chain is complex and we have little appreciation how noise thru metal contact affects everything.
Just my 2 cents...


----------



## nickosiris

^  I second that. Chord did indeed tell us that an 'upgrade' to the PSU was totally unnecessary when the 2Qute came out, but I notice a definite audible improvement with an LPS instead of the stock PSU.


----------



## agedbest

Triode User said:


> Great that you are enjoying it. I never turn my Dave off.



also because you have been advised to leave it always on....

sorry, can you tell me if "Dave" use the same Qutest PSU?


----------



## JWahl

ra990 said:


> Please excuse my ignorance on this, but I don't get the whole aftermarket power supply thing. Does it really make an audible difference? Plus, hasn't the designer already stated that the included power supply is all that's needed and anything else actually voids warranty (that might have been for the 2Qute only)? Why would the product not include an optimal power supply at this price?



All products are engineered to meet a target price point.  And there's a few ways of looking at it.

Either, the 2qute/Qutest use external power supplies to save cost and reduce the end price to consumer, or if the provided is optimal then the extra design into something like the Dave is unnecessary.  I lean toward the former.

That doesn't imply that the included supply is inherently compromised or poorly designed. 

Another possibility, and probably more likely is that since the Qutest isn't driving a complex load like headphones, it doesn't require a beefy power supply that can deliver large current swings.  The Dave probably needs a beefier supply for that reason.  The filtering inside the Qutest should deliver very low noise appropriate with its application.

Sometimes we just like to tweak and improve things though, and I like that the Qutest leaves that option up to the consumer for better value IMO.


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 15, 2018)

With the Qutest I thought Mr. Watts said that noise from the mains would be the concern but to test use a battery pack. Did I read wrong?

Does the LPS improve the 2Qute by noise elimination or something else, I don't own one so haven't read historical threads.

If the LPS  improved the 2Qute beyond noise elimination, what did it do and how? Please use layman's terms, thanks!

I'm new just and want to learn...


----------



## PHC1

Sorry if this has been asked before, I did not find it in the thread but is the Qutest "Roon Ready" ?


----------



## Deftone

JWahl said:


> Different strokes for different folks.
> 
> I can appreciate the strengths of chord DACs, but for my tastes, I find the analog stages to be lacking.  This isn't unique to Chord of course, many ultra low distortion amps are often perceived as sterile.  Chord DAC/Amps like the Mojo do still manage to avoid sounding sterile considering how well they measure.  That's a feat on it's own.  But I still find good external amplification to be more dynamically impactful and spacious.



What if chord DACs aren’t sterile, what if they’ve just stripped away all the fluff that was warming up the music and now you’ve found out that it’s actually a lot recordings are thin and sterile...


----------



## Rob Watts

hifipassion said:


> Looking forward to own such a product.
> However, I pay attention to small details and I'm confused about one thing.
> This information was not included in the initial announcement (on this site) and I saw it added later in the Chord website:
> Does the Qutest have a *Class A output stage *?
> @Rob Watts : Could you please clarify this information for me ?


Yes it is full Class A with discrete transistors, with a single global feedback path.


----------



## agedbest

JWahl said:


> All products are engineered to meet a target price point.
> 
> the 2qute/Qutest use external power supplies to save cost and reduce the end price to consumer, or if the provided is optimal then the extra design into something like the Dave is unnecessary.  I lean toward the former.
> 
> That doesn't imply that the included supply is inherently compromised or poorly designed.




...or it will be a better choise to have a PSU in the middle range or something better than a few bucks range and performance IMO. also because it is well known




JWahl said:


> Sometimes we just like to tweak and improve things though, and I like that the Qutest leaves that option up to the consumer for better value IMO.




.....it would be good to say it and not deny it ... informing the buyer about the possibilities.


----------



## Rob Watts

dmance said:


> As a former 2Qute owner, I went to a Teddy Pardo PSU despite the many posts by Rob Watts that it would make no difference.  But it did, and it was not subtle.  So I (regrettably) put Rob onto the ''emperor has no clothes' mindset.
> But 18months later, I now believe (as Rob Watts indicated) that it was the AC mains noise induced by the factory PSU affected my amplifier.
> 
> So I now, apologetically, admit that the 2Qute outputs are probably identical with factory or aftermarket PSU.  The audio chain is complex and we have little appreciation how noise thru metal contact affects everything.
> Just my 2 cents...



Some history is important here. One of the very real benefits of following Head-Fi is the invaluable feedback of actual users - and this can, and very much has been be used to improve my designs. With the original Qute I could see lots of posters saying that external PSU's were giving much better sound quality - and because of the number of posters, I decided that this was worthy of investigation, as it indicated a sensitivity to PSU quality. Now at the time, Hugo 1 PSU had no change in performance with the charger connected ot not connected; so this implied that the inexpensive PSU was good enough. But Hugo 1 had extra stages of regulation built in from the charger circuit; so with 2 Qute I added an extra stage of regulation, plus more RF filters. Then I used the best PSU possible - a car battery as it has effectively zero impedance, no RF of LF noise, and 300A of current, and compared this to the supplied charger. With Qute I could indeed hear a huge change with the car battery sounding a lot better - richer, smoother, with better depth and instrument separation. But with 2 Qute I could hear no change at all - this validated the improved isolation within 2 Qute.

But still posters were saying that they could hear a change. The problem I have is that I can only report on what I hear - and that is within the context of my listening systems. So does that mean that posters are wrong or that I am wrong? By far the most likely explanation is that people are responding to the PSU affecting other parts of their system; some manufacturers have very little PSU isolation, and are very sensitive to RF noise from switching PSU's - and this is the most likely explanation.

But there are other factors at play, one being placebo (and yes placebo is a very important effect). Secondly, sometimes people prefer things that are actually worse (although it is difficult to imagine a linear PSU being noisier than a switcher - but a quality switcher actually can have lower levels of RF noise than a linear supply).

So it's difficult to predict whether a PSU will give better or worse sound - that's why I suggest trying a USB battery pack and trying for yourself. If that makes no difference, then a LPSU will either be the same, or will actually make the SQ worse by increasing RF noise levels. Do not assume that a LPSU is lower in RF noise....

So I will continue to post only what my experience actually tells me, even if that gets me into trouble; but that of course does not mean my observations will apply in all systems all of the time.


----------



## jayz (Feb 16, 2018)

This is what I did - perhaps others might want to try:

* Experiment yourself - just borrow or purchase an LPS and try it within evaluation period, return it if it makes no difference to *your system*

* If you don't have the time - or don't want to experiment and you have the funds, just get a good LPS knowing it can do no harm to *your system*

* If you find that an LPS makes a difference to *your system*, it is not news, nothing magical, not required to argue here - all this has already been explained to us.

Note the key word referred to here is *your system* - Chord electronics or Rob cannot be expected to cover for every scenario, every use-case and all possible combinations of systems out there. My take is Chord electronics made a technical / strategic decision (considering their own experimental results) that giving away an LPS with every DAC is not good value for money for everyone - I for one applaud this. It takes a confident designer / company to do this - this is clever engineering at play.

At the other end, take typical audiophile brand mentality - bundle a heavy duty, over engineered, ultra super low noise LPS then double the price then everyone is happy. Or better still, start with bad internal power regulation electronics, keep improving it incrementally and charge customers for power supply upgrades every year - perhaps that would have been the solution ?


----------



## jwbrent

What’s the latest word on a release date in the US?


----------



## hifipassion (Feb 16, 2018)

Hi Rob,

Thanks for your reply. Just want to get to the essence of your message.
Let's say we have :
1. A LPS,
2. A battery
3. A SMPS
Let's assume also, in the same order, that the *ripple noise* is *lowest *on the LPS, *lower *on the battery and *noticeable *on the SMPS.
Given *identical *RFI influence that would affect the three sources (*).
 - You are suggesting that it will be no sound difference between the three as the *filtering *inside 2Qute takes care of it ?
- And the *improvements *we could hear are due to *less RFI* rather than *less ripple noise*?
_(*) not sure how exactly RFI is finding its way inside, is but I assume it's picked up by the cable that link the source to the dac_


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 16, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Some history is important here. One of the very real benefits of following Head-Fi is the invaluable feedback of actual users - and this can, and very much has been be used to improve my designs. With the original Qute I could see lots of posters saying that external PSU's were giving much better sound quality - and because of the number of posters, I decided that this was worthy of investigation, as it indicated a sensitivity to PSU quality. Now at the time, Hugo 1 PSU had no change in performance with the charger connected ot not connected; so this implied that the inexpensive PSU was good enough. But Hugo 1 had extra stages of regulation built in from the charger circuit; so with 2 Qute I added an extra stage of regulation, plus more RF filters. Then I used the best PSU possible - a car battery as it has effectively zero impedance, no RF of LF noise, and 300A of current, and compared this to the supplied charger. With Qute I could indeed hear a huge change with the car battery sounding a lot better - richer, smoother, with better depth and instrument separation. But with 2 Qute I could hear no change at all - this validated the improved isolation within 2 Qute.
> 
> But still posters were saying that they could hear a change. The problem I have is that I can only report on what I hear - and that is within the context of my listening systems. So does that mean that posters are wrong or that I am wrong? By far the most likely explanation is that people are responding to the PSU affecting other parts of their system; some manufacturers have very little PSU isolation, and are very sensitive to RF noise from switching PSU's - and this is the most likely explanation.
> 
> ...



Rob Watts,

Rack mounted outlet strips, not a conditioner or UPS, do they have anything that would create noise in their common design? I am planning on using one after my power conditioner.

Thank you so much for this explanation. I am one that likes to do things once and leave the "tweaking" to others.


----------



## aspro

Rob Watts said:


> Some history is important here. One of the very real benefits of following Head-Fi is the invaluable feedback of actual users - and this can, and very much has been be used to improve my designs. With the original Qute I could see lots of posters saying that external PSU's were giving much better sound quality - and because of the number of posters, I decided that this was worthy of investigation, as it indicated a sensitivity to PSU quality. Now at the time, Hugo 1 PSU had no change in performance with the charger connected ot not connected; so this implied that the inexpensive PSU was good enough. But Hugo 1 had extra stages of regulation built in from the charger circuit; so with 2 Qute I added an extra stage of regulation, plus more RF filters. Then I used the best PSU possible - a car battery as it has effectively zero impedance, no RF of LF noise, and 300A of current, and compared this to the supplied charger. With Qute I could indeed hear a huge change with the car battery sounding a lot better - richer, smoother, with better depth and instrument separation. But with 2 Qute I could hear no change at all - this validated the improved isolation within 2 Qute.
> 
> But still posters were saying that they could hear a change. The problem I have is that I can only report on what I hear - and that is within the context of my listening systems. So does that mean that posters are wrong or that I am wrong? By far the most likely explanation is that people are responding to the PSU affecting other parts of their system; some manufacturers have very little PSU isolation, and are very sensitive to RF noise from switching PSU's - and this is the most likely explanation.
> 
> ...



I find the whole power supply issue fascinating.

When I decided to use my Hugo in the main system I bought a £150 Liv(now Innuos) Wave (Cubox based) streamer.  It came with a switch mode power supply.  I upgraded to their battery pack PSU which was better e.g. less grainy.  I then bought an upgraded DC1 £200 linear power supply from Hifi Custom Cables.  The owner Dr Sean Jacobs has worked with Innuos on their power supply design.  This was better still.  I then upgraded to their top DC3 model and the improvement over the DC1 was not subtle. I was pretty amazed by the experience.

The DC3 now powers an Auralic Aries Mini with solid state hard drive which nows feeds a 2Qute.  I bought a DC2 for the 2Qute, admittedly for peace of mind so I don't have any switch mode PSUs in the system at all (I don't need a NAS with the Mini acting as server).

I don't doubt what Rob Watts says but if it's posssible to avoid expensive, heavy and costly linear PSUs by circuit design and filtering why is the rest of the Hifi industry so focused on linear power supplies?  I have 4 of the damn things in my system (turntable,streamer, DAC and preamp).

The other thing that surprises me is the relative lack of high quality switch mode supplies on the market.

My digital player/server consistes of 4 boxes.  Two admittedly are very small (Aries Mini and 2Qute) but the power supplies are much bigger.

My wish would be for a Qutest with an integral Poly (notwithstanding the teething problems) which has a user fit hard drive so it could act as a player and server like the Aries Mini. This would be a very elegant and cost effective solution.  I might even resist changing the PSU that came with it!


----------



## agedbest (Feb 16, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Then I used the best PSU possible - a car battery as it has effectively zero impedance, no RF of LF noise, and 300A of current, and compared this to the supplied charger. With Qute I could indeed hear a huge change with the car battery sounding a lot better - richer, smoother, with better depth and instrument separation. But with 2 Qute I could hear no change at all - this validated the improved isolation within 2 Qute.



Sorry Rob, where do you found a 300A 12v DC on the market? ....because if there is one, i want it also me...... may be you are refering to battery CCA capability, but is not the same.

and not useable as refence for Qutest because there is not a 5v DC battery....
 nothing without an internal swich....switch can output same noise of PSU added in the box
for this reason a 5v powerbank can not be used to compare the factory PSU


----------



## jcn3

PHC1 said:


> Sorry if this has been asked before, I did not find it in the thread but is the Qutest "Roon Ready" ?



the qutest is not a player/streamer -- it is a dac.  players/streamers may or may not be roon ready, not dacs.


----------



## rettib2001

With units starting to make their way to customers I was wondering if anybody feels confortable enough commenting on which, between the coax input and USB, sounds the best (subjective)?

I ask because I've just opened my 'gadget draw' and I've got a Schiit Eitr, Curious Cable and Allo DigiOne with a decent BNC to BNC cable as options for output from a Raspberry Pi 3 (Roon/HQplayer Naa/Audirvana DLNA).

Which one should I use and which ones should go?


----------



## jayz

agedbest said:


> Sorry Rob, where do you found a 300A 12v DC on the market? ....because if there is one, i want it also me......



You are in luck. There is an offer currently http://www.halfords.com/motoring/bu...ear-guarantee-hb063-lead-acid-12v-car-battery


----------



## AlexB73

I have a negitive expirience using LPSU with 2qute.
I had MRCU LPS for 2qute. I did long break-in for this device. 
But tonal ballance of 2qute-MRCU LPSU was horrible, untatural, non-musical.
I have more than 18 years expiriance in audiophilea  and I listened a lot of diferent sources in my current system. I never heared such awful tonal ballance before.
My respect to Rob Watts good test, because 2qute has a very good tonal ballance with the wall power supply.
I believe that other LPSU can sound better with 2qute compared the wall power supply. But my experience with MRCU LPSU was very negative. 
Bottom line I lost my money by reselling MRCU LPSU.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 16, 2018)

jayz said:


> You are in luck. There is an offer currently http://www.halfords.com/motoring/bu...ear-guarantee-hb063-lead-acid-12v-car-battery




Sorry but Startup Power: 360 Amps is Cold Cranking Amps (CCA) for a battery NOT the battery capacity - measure the discharge load in amperes that a new, fully-charged battery can deliver for 30 seconds, while still maintaining terminal voltage equal to or higher than 1.20 volts per cell in a cold environment (0°F/-18°C).

what you linked is 41A capacity battery, so you are wrong

my question to Rob Watts still remain


----------



## Triode User

agedbest said:


> Sorry but Startup Power: 360 Amps is Cold Cranking Amps (CCA) for a battery NOT the battery capacity - measure the discharge load in amperes that a new, fully-charged battery can deliver for 30 seconds, while still maintaining terminal voltage equal to or higher than 1.20 volts per cell in a cold environment (0°F/-18°C).
> 
> what you linked is 41A capacity battery, so you are wrong
> 
> my question to Rob Watts still remain



I’m not sure what your point is apart from proving pedantry. If a battery can deliver 360A for 30 secs then for sure it is capable of providing far more current than any of the other two types of power supply (unless you think different but you haven’t said that). So what is your point? Do you think the current delivery from the battery is inferior to the other two supplies? After all, the battery was only used as a reference point to establish whether other supplies were inferior and if they weren’t then it was fair to assume that they were not affecting the sound quality.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 16, 2018)

Triode User said:


> I’m not sure what your point is apart from proving pedantry. If a battery can deliver 360A for 30 secs then for sure it is capable of providing far more current than any of the other two types of power supply (unless you think different but you haven’t said that). So what is your point? Do you think the current delivery from the battery is inferior to the other two supplies? After all, the battery was only used as a reference point to establish whether other supplies were inferior and if they weren’t then it was fair to assume that they were not affecting the sound quality.



I think you want to belittle my speech
and I do not think this is the right way to approach
if a question has no answer .... or the answer is vague

I found an inaccuracy said by Rob, and I pointed it out, as I did with your previous answer.


my point of view seems clear to everyone,
I do not find absolutely correct to compare the PSU with a battery that has the same problems, as it has an internal switch for DC / DC conversion, and can not be considered free of contamination ......
if you can explain to me that it has none, I will be happy to listen to you.

The question will remain unresolved until a test can be carried out with a source free of contamination. also it's a common misconception that a battery supply is best PSU


----------



## Skampmeister

I’m kinda hoping for a next week delivery in Australia for mine. My 2qute has already been paid for in advance by a keen, but patient buyer


----------



## jayz

agedbest said:


> what you linked is 41A capacity battery, so you are wrong



They are on sale, just get Ten and wire them parallel - bingo.


----------



## agedbest

jayz said:


> They are on sale, just get Ten and wire them parallel - bingo.




the question was: there is a 300A 12v DC on the market?
also you was not able to find ...so there isn't
Rob Watts had one? ....


----------



## mtmercer

As someone who knows absolutely nothing about power supplies but reads various discussions about how power supplies impact DAC/Amp performance, would running the Qutest from a USB battery bank such as an Anker or this, http://a.co/9NioTd5, possibly improve performance of the Qutest?


----------



## panditji

I don't understand the obsession of people wanting Rob Watts to admit that power supplies make a difference when he has said otherwise time and again... He admitted that they made a difference with the Qute but not with the 2Qute... And if you still believe that power supplies make a difference on the 2Qute, then spend your money and buy one.. Why the obsession with convincing Mr. Watts? It's his product and he was not able to differentiate when he experimented... If you can, then do report on the forum and let people decide if they want one....


----------



## agedbest (Feb 17, 2018)

mtmercer said:


> As someone who knows absolutely nothing about power supplies but reads various discussions about how power supplies impact DAC/Amp performance, would running the Qutest from a USB battery bank such as an Anker or this, http://a.co/9NioTd5, possibly improve performance of the Qutest?




it's a common misconception that a battery supply is the ultimate PSU.

Furthermore all the powerbanks on the market use an internal battery of different amperage (capacity), but with same voltage of 3.7v, then by a switching DC / DC converting circuitry,
 without any filter, it exit at 5V. any converting makes interference, regardless of the quality, brand, appearance, cost, etc., etc.
any powerbank can not improve your audio system, definitively powerbank can NOT be the solution. would waste your money unnecessarily.


----------



## Rob Watts

agedbest said:


> the question was: there is a 300A 12v DC on the market?
> also you was not able to find ...so there isn't
> Rob Watts had one? ....



It was a "portable" battery to enable you to start cars with flat batteries, and was rated at 300A, but I am sure that is just peak surge current rating. It doesn't matter whether it is 300A or 3A; all that is important is ultra low impedance, and ultra low noise, which a car battery has plenty of, way better than any mains linear PSU.


----------



## flyte3333 (Feb 17, 2018)

agedbest said:


> and not useable as refence for Qutest because there is not a 5v DC battery....
> nothing without an internal swich....switch can output same noise of PSU added in the box
> for this reason a 5v powerbank can not be used to compare the factory PSU



Sure there is - here is a big capacity one in a sensibly sized package: https://www.tp-link.com/uk/products/details/cat-5689_TL-PB20100.html

Regarding the output noise you mention, I don't think this is what Rob is talking about when he discusses RF...

I think it's the fact that the USB battery power supply is not connected to mains power, therefore no path of leakage currents via this power supply, therefore no RF pickup and RF getting into the DAC via this micro USB power cable

The output noise of the USB battery pack, which can be no different to an SMPS, will be regulated inside the DAC anyway... the leakage currents can sometimes pose a bigger issue,  depending what the DAC is connected to.

I'm sure Rob will correct me though! I THINK I've understood his and John Swenson's posts on leakage current loops but may have it wrong!


----------



## agedbest (Feb 17, 2018)

Em2016 said:


> Sure there is - here is a big capacity one in a sensibly sized package: https://www.tp-link.com/uk/products/details/cat-5689_TL-PB20100.html



surely not
also the battery that you have linked use six lithium battery of 3.7v then then by switching DC / DC converting circuitry, without any filter, it exit at 5V. any converting makes interference.
on the market there is no 5v battery, at least not yet.
and in any case it would not be possible to use it, without a regulator and stabilizer to meet USB standard input / output power rate.


----------



## flyte3333 (Feb 17, 2018)

agedbest said:


> surely not
> also the battery that you have linked use six lithium battery of 3.7v then then by switching DC / DC converting circuitry, without any filter, it exit at 5V. any converting makes interference.
> on the market there is no 5v battery, at least not yet.
> and in any case it would not be possible to use it, without a regulator and stabilizer to meet USB standard input / output power.



But this isn't what the testing with a 5Vdc USB battery pack (trying before buying a linear PSU) is about... it's not about the voltage output/ripple. It's more about blocking a path of leakage currents and RF pickup by the microUSB power cable, into the DAC...

I already mentioned  "The output noise of the USB battery pack, which can be no different to an SMPS, will be regulated inside the DAC anyway... the leakage currents can sometimes pose a bigger issue, depending what the DAC is connected to."


----------



## agedbest (Feb 17, 2018)

also battery has Power Supply Noise...also without a switch converter
so add battery noise to switch noise, without any filter, is not the right way to go

if someone already owns a powerbank he can try ....
but I would not feel advised to buy it specifically to try ..
because I do not consider it suitable for the purpose.


----------



## jayz (Feb 17, 2018)

My Qutest has had some workout now and have to say this thing is starting to sound phenomenal.

Last night I ran the Isotek system setup CD http://www.isoteksystems.com/products/essentials/ultimate-system-set-up-disc which I use to fine tune speaker placement and toe-in. It got to Track 12 which is the last of the soundstage test. This track involves a castanet being played and moved around a room in a circle and the person describing it moving in the same circle at the opposite end. Imaging was one of the strengths of my system even before but with the Qutest it is almost surreal to hear this track. Even during the brief moments when the presenter pause between words, you could tell he was on the move. It was as if his breath was filling that void between the words but you couldn't actually hear him breathe.


----------



## dac64 (Feb 17, 2018)

I'm expecting a Chord Qutest soon, uses OPPO SACD/CD player as source, maybe a Win notebook later, and HDMI to optical converter to output DSD directly from OPPO to Qutest.

I also found a portable car battery, with 2x 5V/2.1A USB outputs, may get one to compare with the stock power supply.

https://www.amazon.com/Portable-Starter-INTELLIBOOST-Flashlight-Charging/dp/B01AKQPBE8/ref=sm_n_se_dkp_SG_pr_sea_0_3?adId=B01JJZQPB4&creativeASIN=B01JJZQPB4&linkId=87e95546861770e55aa8605ae1b6eb12&tag=cbccnsatop-20&linkCode=w42&ref-refURL=https://www.carbatterychargerscentral.com/car-starter-top-7-compact-battery-jump-starters/&slotNum=0&imprToken=VbPiQAw5FvGltP4LABGzZw&adType=smart&adMode=search&adFormat=grid&impressionTimestamp=1518917562495&th=1

Well, if car battery is way better than any mains linear PSU, we could have save some money!


----------



## PHC1

The iFi power supplies are really good. https://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/accessory-ipower/


----------



## agedbest (Feb 18, 2018)

if you are looking for an IFI power unit...

why not take a look at this https://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-iusbpower/
or this https://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/nano-iusb3-0/

take also UBS noise under control, maybe are more interesting

but all need to prove it when applied to your audio system.


----------



## Bulbsofpassion

My experience with the iFi iPower is not "really good". Whilst it may supply clean power to whatever it's powering via USB, it kicks back so much noise back into the mains it's not really usable for hifi/speaker applications (would be fine if you're listening to something like a Mojo/Hugo via headphones as there's no amplifier for the iPower to contaminate). My setup was Mojo + iPower + Naim Nait 5si.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 18, 2018)

Bulbsofpassion said:


> My experience with the iFi iPower is not "really good". Whilst it may supply clean power to whatever it's powering via USB, it kicks back so much noise back into the mains it's not really usable for hifi/speaker applications (would be fine if you're listening to something like a Mojo/Hugo via headphones as there's no amplifier for the iPower to contaminate). My setup was Mojo + iPower + Naim Nait 5si.



Thank you for sharing your experience with IFI iPower + Chord
it is much apreciate.


----------



## PHC1

Bulbsofpassion said:


> My experience with the iFi iPower is not "really good". Whilst it may supply clean power to whatever it's powering via USB, it kicks back so much noise back into the mains it's not really usable for hifi/speaker applications (would be fine if you're listening to something like a Mojo/Hugo via headphones as there's no amplifier for the iPower to contaminate). My setup was Mojo + iPower + Naim Nait 5si.


 Have not noticed that at all with my speaker system and neither have any of my friends with theirs. Then again we all use power conditioners as well.


----------



## hmartin

Bulbsofpassion said:


> My experience with the iFi iPower is not "really good". Whilst it may supply clean power to whatever it's powering via USB, it kicks back so much noise back into the mains it's not really usable for hifi/speaker applications (would be fine if you're listening to something like a Mojo/Hugo via headphones as there's no amplifier for the iPower to contaminate). My setup was Mojo + iPower + Naim Nait 5si.


This is my experience also, I have two different 9V and one 5V, and they all create too much noise to be usable unless you only power a Mojo or similar.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

Hey!

Any of you guys checked this video  which claims similar sound to Dave from Qutest? Thats a bold claim! But I still dont understand how can someone hear the difference from the 2 devices listening from youtube with a normal DAC?

I will put my hand on the Qutest next week. Cant wait to let you all know my first audio impressions.


----------



## PHC1

adrian.clopotari said:


> Hey!
> 
> Any of you guys checked this video  which claims similar sound to Dave from Qutest? Thats a bold claim! But I still dont understand how can someone hear the difference from the 2 devices listening from youtube with a normal DAC?
> 
> I will put my hand on the Qutest next week. Cant wait to let you all know my first audio impressions.


 The reviewer himself was not listening from youtube and obviously being familiar with the gear he used he heard similarities between Dave and Qutest. Would that not make sense since they are both from Chord and share similar design philosophy?


----------



## adrian.clopotari

I didnt made myself clear.

I wondered from the point of the viewer (listener), not the reviewer.

I dont contest the reviewer who made the experiment, but I wonder how can I listen to the experiment via youtube when all the sound I get is through my cheap laptop speakers with no DAC? Im not there! And all the sound i get is indirect. In order for me to hear the difference I must be there and to listen directly. Otherwise, to me it makes no sense to buy a DAC, when all I have to do is play a youtube file uploaded by someone who uses the most expensive DAC.


----------



## Triode User

adrian.clopotari said:


> I didnt made myself clear.
> 
> I wondered from the point of the viewer (listener), not the reviewer.
> 
> I dont contest the reviewer who made the experiment, but I wonder how can I listen to the experiment via youtube when all the sound I get is through my cheap laptop speakers with no DAC? Im not there! And all the sound i get is indirect. In order for me to hear the difference I must be there and to listen directly. Otherwise, to me it makes no sense to buy a DAC, when all I have to do is play a youtube file uploaded by someone who uses the most expensive DAC.



Of course these videos are harmless fun and no more than that. The Qutest is as far as I know essentially a Hugo2 without the battery and without the volume so it would be likely that they would sound pretty similar. Hugo 2 launched amid a load of hype that it was a ‘Dave on the cheap’. That has all settled down now and I think it is fair to say it is now accepted as no such thing but it is significant and amazing performance in its own right. Qutest is still in the hype phase and no doubt that will also settle down.


----------



## PHC1

adrian.clopotari said:


> I didnt made myself clear.
> 
> I wondered from the point of the viewer (listener), not the reviewer.
> 
> I dont contest the reviewer who made the experiment, but I wonder how can I listen to the experiment via youtube when all the sound I get is through my cheap laptop speakers with no DAC? Im not there! And all the sound i get is indirect. In order for me to hear the difference I must be there and to listen directly. Otherwise, to me it makes no sense to buy a DAC, when all I have to do is play a youtube file uploaded by someone who uses the most expensive DAC.


 You are correct. Watching a youtube video with compressed sound and computer speakers will not tell you much.


----------



## agedbest (Feb 18, 2018)

what i noted in this video was the reviewer not used the PSU from chord...but a powerbank "not designed for audio but..."

why didn't he use the factory PSU?

as tell us: i used a powerbank not designed for audio, because for now i have not something better....but it is better than the factory PSU.

I would not want this to be the preview of the same old story
for now I do not say more ...... we'll see.


----------



## tony wilson

Bulbsofpassion said:


> My experience with the iFi iPower is not "really good". Whilst it may supply clean power to whatever it's powering via USB, it kicks back so much noise back into the mains it's not really usable for hifi/speaker applications (would be fine if you're listening to something like a Mojo/Hugo via headphones as there's no amplifier for the iPower to contaminate). My setup was Mojo + iPower + Naim Nait 5si.




ifi uses interesting technology but it pollutes or as they say noise cancels by dumping a different noise into the system to cancel out other noises.
probably top of the tree  is paul hynes power supply and uptone audio ultracap but both units are expensive high end.

the provided wall wart for the cutest is the best sounding i have heard but as  mr watts has stated that is not the  adapter but the work that has been done inside the cutest.
regardless of how a switch power supply sounds  via the dac i do not like them near my high fi system  uptone audio use a switch supply tp power the ultracaps again not perfect.
chord have chosen to use microusb on a table unit i do not like the connections i prefer lemo or hirose i understand those  are not standard  i like the voltage but not the connection.
micro usb can get loose over time
at the moment i am using a heavy duty usb battery  and the sound is the most complex i have ever heard via a dac quiet  like being in a chasm 1000 foot underground very quiet but loud when you crank up the sound.at first i preferred the sound of the mojo my dealer suggested an evening of colour the cutest has filters via the colour toggle  it is a waste of time clicking clicking  toggling for tone  changes at the press of a button   not sure what the green filter light means but it is  causing me great problems

with the neighbours..

should have spent 1 day on green but i am still on it.  i have a highly regarded benchmark dac  lovely well made unit the  cutest out of the box on a cold winter day  tramples all over it i understand they are very different units but in terms of sound you get lost in the sound of this chord .
the benchmark dac you get tired and want to go home  with the cutest  it is like being in a rainforest surrounded by sounds music you thought you knew but are only just discovering.
the benchmark dac  is packed up and looking for a new home..


----------



## dawktah2

C'mon US dealers...


----------



## PHC1 (Feb 18, 2018)

I wasn't going to suggest it since many may find the price of this power supply a bit excessive but Keces builds quality products. They are a major supplier of toroidal transformers and other stuff for many much higher cost products. I use their power conditioner for my headphone listening gear and it is great. They also have the power supplies. Worth a look. http://keces-audio-usa.com/


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 18, 2018)

agedbest said:


>


----------



## Bulbsofpassion

PHC1 said:


> Have not noticed that at all with my speaker system and neither have any of my friends with theirs. Then again we all use power conditioners as well.



Pause the music and turn your amp up to full, and listen to what the tweeters are putting out. Then replace the iPower with a regular Apple iPhone charger and see if you get the same. I also tried this on some Mackie active speakers and got identical results to the Mojo/Naim set up. 
Whilst I accept the Apple charger *may* put more noise into the DAC, it's completely undetectable to my ears, and it definitely doesn't put anywhere near as much (detectable) noise back into the mains (and into the amp) as the iFi, and fwiw is also better than the standard Anker 2-port charger.


----------



## PHC1 (Feb 18, 2018)

Can't say much about the Qutest yet but I can vouch for the Luxman L-509AX Mark II in that video since that is what I use for my speakers.


----------



## agedbest

PHC1 said:


> I wasn't going to suggest it since many may find the price of this power supply a bit excessive but Keces builds quality products. They are a major supplier of toroidal transformers and other stuff for many much higher cost products. I use their power conditioner for my headphone listening gear and it is great. They also have the power supplies. Worth a look. http://keces-audio-usa.com/



*Compatibility & DC output version*

*1. Directly power DC 24V based phono stage or for all audio device that run on DC 24V.*
*2. Directly power DC 20V based Laptop or for all audio device that run on DC 20V.*
*3. Directly power DC 19V based NUC, Thin ITX system and Laptop or for all audio device that run on DC 19V.*
*4. Directly power DC 18V based Pro-Ject products or for all audio device that run on DC 18V.*
*5. Directly power DC 15V based Alpha Design Labs products or for all audio device that run on DC 15V.*
*6. Directly power DC 12V based Mac Mini or for all audio device that run on DC 12V.*
*7. Directly power DC 9V based SOtM products or for all audio device that run on DC 9V.*
*8. Directly power DC 7V based SOtM products or for all audio device that run on DC 7V.*
*9. Directly power DC 5V based Squeezebox or for audio device that run on DC 5V.*
*10. USB Output provide DC 5V @1A. Directly power DC5V based USB DAC.*
*




*
**All version included a USB output*


*Specs*


*DC Connector:  2.1mm Barrel*
*AC Input Voltage:  115V 60Hz / 230V 50Hz (User switchable)*
*Power Consumption:  210 Watts (Full Load Output)*
*Casing:  Aluminum*
*Dimension:  (WxDxH)  300x220x66mm*
*Weight:  6kg*


seen the high price this LPS could be interesting for those who must power other components with different voltage, and use the USB output present in all versions to power the DAC


----------



## PHC1

Bulbsofpassion said:


> Pause the music and turn your amp up to full, and listen to what the tweeters are putting out. Then replace the iPower with a regular Apple iPhone charger and see if you get the same. I also tried this on some Mackie active speakers and got identical results to the Mojo/Naim set up.
> Whilst I accept the Apple charger *may* put more noise into the DAC, it's completely undetectable to my ears, and it definitely doesn't put anywhere near as much (detectable) noise back into the mains (and into the amp) as the iFi, and fwiw is also better than the standard Anker 2-port charger.


I'll give it a try since I am using an iFi power supply for my Wyred4Sound Recovery Module (usb re-reclocker/buffer) but again, everything is plugged into power conditioners in my systems so it is dead quiet even with tube gear.


----------



## agedbest

Bulbsofpassion said:


> Pause the music and turn your amp up to full, and listen to what the tweeters are putting out.




like this..... is simple trick i made always in my sistem also......tell you if something are going wrong
but it is better you connect one unit a time to better identify which component is not functioning properly


----------



## Triode User

PHC1 said:


> I'll give it a try since I am using an iFi power supply for my Wyred4Sound Recovery Module (usb re-reclocker/buffer) but again, everything is plugged into power conditioners in my systems so it is dead quiet even with tube gear.



It depends of course on what type of power conditioners you have. Some detract from the power supply available and not all are effective. If the HiFi kit is properly designed it should not benefit from a power conditioner anyway.

But it is right that many power supplies are very noisy and inject noise into the mains.


----------



## PHC1

Triode User said:


> It depends of course on what type of power conditioners you have. Some detract from the power supply available and not all are effective. If the HiFi kit is properly designed it should not benefit from a power conditioner anyway.
> 
> But it is right that many power supplies are very noisy and inject noise into the mains.


I've owned and tried so many power conditioners over the 30 years of being into high end audio that I am very familiar with what works and what doesn't  Power conditioners, AC regenerators, regenerators with battery boost that protect from over and under voltage and give bursts of current for demanding dynamic transients, etc.. Richard Gray, PS Audio, Torus, PurePower, etc... Not going to find too many serious systems without a decent power conditioner on our side of the pond. (US)


----------



## Deftone (Feb 18, 2018)

Ragnar-BY said:


> Interesting thing - there are so many manufacturers, who use "latest chips", but all the DAC-talk is usually about Chord and Schiit DACs. I think my next DAC would be from one of those companies. Mostly because both companies use their own tech instead of throwing in the standard DAC-chip. *For me the competitor for Chord Qutest would be a Schiit Gungnir Multibit. Schiit has both balanced and single-ended outputs and it is a cheaper option. So I hope Qutest would perform clearly better to justify the lack of balanced connections and higher price. Looking forward for somebody to compare those two. *Unfortunately, in my country there would be no chance to audition one or another.



Yes that would be the fair comparison that i made. UK prices are Chord Qutest £1,195 and Schiit Gungnir Multibit £1,100. Very close actually...

I dont know why anyone would compare the Qutest with the Yggdrasil on pricing because Yggrasil is £2,200 / $3,090


----------



## mtmercer

Is there a recommended method to convert the single ended qutest output to true balanced with the least reduction in quality or addition of noise for use with a balanced amp?

Assuming the amp cannot properly do it.


----------



## PHC1

mtmercer said:


> Is there a recommended method to convert the single ended qutest output to true balanced with the least reduction in quality or addition of noise for use with a balanced amp?
> 
> Assuming the amp cannot properly do it.


 Unless driving very long cables and need the common mode rejection of noise of balanced cables, don't always assume they sound better. They often don't, problem being the cheap quality op-amps in the signal path needed for balanced operation. Single Ended very often sounds much more relaxed and musical. Not to be confused with balanced drive in headphones. Balanced headphone jacks may well be more dynamic depending on the amp topology but... always try single ended as well and see which one is the more "musical" and "organic" sounding.


----------



## JWahl

mtmercer said:


> Is there a recommended method to convert the single ended qutest output to true balanced with the least reduction in quality or addition of noise for use with a balanced amp?
> 
> Assuming the amp cannot properly do it.



If you absolutely must, I think the best method is a high quality passive transformer based rca to Xlr box.  The downside is that quality ones are expensive (~$500) and transformers have their own tradeoffs.  Though they also have the added benefit of isolating the source from the amp as well.


----------



## agedbest

Deftone said:


> Yes that would be the fair comparison that i made. UK prices are Chord Qutest £1,195 and Schiit Gungnir Multibit £1,100. Very close actually...
> 
> I dont know why anyone would compare the Qutest with the Yggdrasil on pricing because Yggrasil is £2,200 / $3,090




the Chord Qutest and the Schiit Gungnir Multibit are both in my sights
if to Chord Qutest i will must add also the cost of a LPS its competitor will certainly become the Schiit Yggdrasil
unfortunately for now the Chord Qutest is not yet available at the local store
and in any case it will not be possible to make a direct comparison because I do not find a store that sells them both for different commercial distribution lines
so I can only test them separately.


----------



## plsvn

Deftone said:


> I dont know why anyone would compare the Qutest with the Yggdrasil on pricing because Yggrasil is £2,200 / $3,090



well... these days last year a 2Qute I bought for my secondary system ended up replacing, in my main system, a €3000 Metrum Hex I was deeply in love with 
it actually was a really close match with the Metrum still being a little bit more musical and having quite some better soundstage rendering than the 2Qute but the Metrum doesn't do DSD so in the end...


----------



## mtmercer

PHC1 said:


> Unless driving very long cables and need the common mode rejection of noise of balanced cables, don't always assume they sound better. They often don't, problem being the cheap quality op-amps in the signal path needed for balanced operation. Single Ended very often sounds much more relaxed and musical. Not to be confused with balanced drive in headphones. Balanced headphone jacks may well be more dynamic depending on the amp topology but... always try single ended as well and see which one is the more "musical" and "organic" sounding.



Roger that.  I guess a different way to approach the issue would be to ask "What would be end game single ended solid state amp recommendations to go with the Qutest?"


----------



## theveterans

mtmercer said:


> Roger that.  I guess a different way to approach the issue would be to ask "What would be end game single ended solid state amp recommendations to go with the Qutest?"



If you don't want to lose Chord's transparency as much as possible, I recommend the Headamp GSX MK2 since it's highly regarded as one of the most transparent headphone amp available on the market.


----------



## SilverEars (Feb 19, 2018)

PHC1 said:


> Unless driving very long cables and need the common mode rejection of noise of balanced cables, don't always assume they sound better. They often don't, problem being the cheap quality op-amps in the signal path needed for balanced operation. Single Ended very often sounds much more relaxed and musical. Not to be confused with balanced drive in headphones. Balanced headphone jacks may well be more dynamic depending on the amp topology but... always try single ended as well and see which one is the more "musical" and "organic" sounding.


Something I've noticed is that balanced tend to sound punchier and sounds more forward, I think this maybe due to greater gain on the drivers.  Sound stage is seems larger and has a more ambient feel.  The instrumentals sounded livelier, but at the cost of vocals sounding punchier in sibilant due to the forward nature of the balanced.  So, I could see what you mean by SE sounding more relaxed.

I think the main factor of this balanced sound is attributed to the amp topology than being dual-DAC output balanced or not.  You just hook the SE output from the DAC to amp that output balanced.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

mtmercer said:


> Roger that.  I guess a different way to approach the issue would be to ask "What would be end game single ended solid state amp recommendations to go with the Qutest?"


If I have to upgrade now, I would buy a Violectric V281.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

theveterans said:


> If you don't want to lose Chord's transparency as much as possible, I recommend the Headamp GSX MK2 since it's highly regarded as one of the most transparent headphone amp available on the market.


Great amp, but it would drive headphones balanced only with balanced source. With Qutest you would have only single-ended amplification from Headamp.


----------



## PHC1 (Feb 19, 2018)

SilverEars said:


> Something I've noticed is that balanced tend to sound punchier and sounds more forward, I think this maybe due to greater gain on the drivers.  Sound stage is seems larger and has a more ambient feel.  The instrumentals sounded livelier, but at the cost of vocals sounding punchier in sibilant due to the forward nature of the balanced.  So, I could see what you mean by SE sounding more relaxed.
> 
> I think the main factor of this balanced sound is attributed to the amp topology than being dual-DAC output balanced or not.  You just hook the SE output from the DAC to amp that output balanced.


 Yes!


----------



## PHC1

Yes, I've used the V281 with balanced and SE "inputs". Both sound equally great. Now, the Balanced headphone "output" does offer a bit more fidelity over the SE output but it depends on the partnering headphones. I'm loving the XMOS DAC module in the V281 as well. Using it right now to drive my speaker system waiting on another outboard DAC and it sounds pretty damn great for the $300 upcharge on the V281. That of course goes against the main interest of those interested in the Qutest!  I am not suggesting the XMOS DAC module is in any way better than the Qutest, just saying it is pretty damn musical.


----------



## jayz

agedbest said:


> what i noted in this video was the reviewer not used the PSU from chord...but a powerbank "not designed for audio but..."




What I saw in the video was Quest the DAC,  nothing more nothing less.

Have to say this fetish trying to prove a point with power supply is seriously getting out of hand. There is nothing remaining for those of us common Joes to prove. Even if we do, what possible value is there in the outcome. If someone is interested and they have the funds, and the time, do experiment but bare in mind the findings are relevant only to that particular setup and that scenario. How difficult is that point to understand?

Quest is a game changing DAC at this pricepoint in my opinion (speaking as an owner) and these other low-value, insignificant, overhyped, exaggerated, irrelevant, distractions are taking the fun out of talking about this great DAC.


----------



## thiepval68

Just received a qutest...it is simply outstanding...direct replacement for the original Hugo and delivers so much more...currently listening qutest to violectric V200 to HD800.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

thiepval68 said:


> Just received a qutest...it is simply outstanding...direct replacement for the original Hugo and delivers so much more...currently listening qutest to violectric V200 to HD800.


How it sounds with less than perfect records? How about sibilance?


----------



## SilverEars (Feb 20, 2018)

Ragnar-BY said:


> How it sounds with less than perfect records? How about sibilance?


Interesting you ask.  I can't speak of Qutest, but Mojo seems to reduce sibilant sounds, and this can effect how the amp intereacts to it or the tranducer outputs the sounds. I know DAVE does it in it's way, it thins out the sibilant sounds. Sibilant sounds can be thick or thin depending on the analog I think.


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 20, 2018)

jayz said:


> What I saw in the video was Quest the DAC,  nothing more nothing less.
> 
> Have to say this fetish trying to prove a point with power supply is seriously getting out of hand. There is nothing remaining for those of us common Joes to prove. Even if we do, what possible value is there in the outcome. If someone is interested and they have the funds, and the time, do experiment but bare in mind the findings are relevant only to that particular setup and that scenario. How difficult is that point to understand?
> 
> Quest is a game changing DAC at this pricepoint in my opinion (speaking as an owner) and these other low-value, insignificant, overhyped, exaggerated, irrelevant, distractions are taking the fun out of talking about this great DAC.



I agree, I am concerned that *all* the posts from this account has been on this thread.


----------



## agedbest

jayz said:


> What I saw in the video was Quest the DAC,  nothing more nothing less....






you did not watch well. watch from 8.21 minute of the video when the reviewer exposes the components. he shows and says exactly what I have reported.
I was really astonished that he had not used the PSE inside the package. since there was certainly no lack of power supply.

if so far someone has thought that what I said .... was just a rumor....

I find inadequate its PSU for the price asked, and i am not the only one to think so.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

SilverEars said:


> Interesting you ask.  I can't speak of Qutest, but Mojo seems to reduce sibilant sounds, and this can effect how the amp intereacts to it or the tranducer outputs the sounds. I know DAVE does it in it's way, it thins out the sibilant sounds. Sibilant sounds can be thick or thin depending on the analog I think.


My Fostex TH-900 are very sensitive to this. These cans could be very sibilant with bright source. I tried different DACs with my TH-900 and V200 and got very different results. Meridian is most forgiving DAC I have heard so far. I`m trying to find something that would sound better without sacrificing the comfort.


----------



## dac64

agedbest said:


> I find inadequate its PSU for the price asked, and i am not the only one to think so.



Hi agedbest,

Sorry to ask, do you intended to buy a Qutest? If yes, you could compare the stock, lsp and car jump start.

I believe all the Qutest owners will benefit from your feedback.


----------



## mtmercer

dac64 said:


> Hi agedbest,
> 
> Sorry to ask, do you intended to buy a Qutest? If yes, you could compare the stock, lsp and car jump start.
> 
> I believe all the Qutest owners will benefit from your feedback.



Throw in this one so it is comprehensive:


I understand it enhances the timbre and is very analogue like.


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 20, 2018)

dac64 said:


> Hi agedbest,
> 
> Sorry to ask, do you intended to buy a Qutest? If yes, you could compare the stock, lsp and car jump start.
> 
> I believe all the Qutest owners will benefit from your feedback.





i believe aged best is what they call a tyre kicker  : ) 
he should design his own battery,power supply and dsp  call it aged beast tesla dac va va voom
it should also provide emough wind power to kick start your most small sailing boats


----------



## dac64

Guys, it's good to have somebody like agedbest!


----------



## agedbest

mtmercer said:


> Throw in this one so it is comprehensive:
> 
> 
> I understand it enhances the timbre and is very analogue like.




very, very nice .... try it, it could relax you


----------



## agedbest

dac64 said:


> Hi agedbest,
> 
> Sorry to ask, do you intended to buy a Qutest? If yes, you could compare the stock, lsp and car jump start.
> 
> I believe all the Qutest owners will benefit from your feedback.




unlike others .... I do not buy anything in a closed box.
I'll have to listen to it at local shop
for now it is not available, from what they tell me it will be available for the middle or end of next month.


----------



## agedbest

dac64 said:


> Guys, it's good to have somebody like agedbest!



Thank You


----------



## agedbest

dawktah2 said:


> I agree, I am concerned that *all* the posts from this account has been on this thread.



I would be more concerned about the product warranty.

as happened in the past with previous models ... if you do not use the factory PSU will affect the warranty.

I think it's another reason to expect from Chord a decent PSU.

but i think is to late now, so a list of approved LPS would be much appreciate.

just in case someone is not enthusiastic about the PSU provided (in the past there were many) and has some extra money to spend.


----------



## Triode User

agedbest said:


> I would be more concerned about the product warranty.
> 
> as happened in the past with previous models ... if you do not use the factory PSU will affect the warranty.
> 
> ...



I am afraid that your motives take on a more disingenuous tone each time you post.
Chord can speak for themselves but Rob Watts has been quite clear in his view that the supplied PSU is more than 'decent' and that he has not been able to hear any improvement when using other PSUs. He has suggested that any improvement heard by others might be due to other factors rather than alternative PSUs being better for 2Qute or Qutest.
It is totally unreasonable to expect a manufacturer to test other suppliers PSU and produce a list of 'approved' LPS. I'm sorry, but what planet are you on?
I know that the mods don't like it when posts get a bit confrontational but I just had to say that.


----------



## agedbest

I'm sorry that you do not like what I write, but I respect your point of view.
and I expect you to do the same.
I also respect the point of view of Rob Watts, and his company.
I would not be here to write if I did not find their product interesting. in fact I'm waiting to try it soon, when it will be available. I have only externalized what I do not like and which I am convinced of, and I can not of course claim that it can be shared by everyone. it remains my personal critique of the product, shared or not.


for those interested in learning more about the likely LPS to be combined with Qutest, the same youtuber is planning something in a short time. we'll see.


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 21, 2018)

agedbest said:


> I'm sorry that you do not like what I write, but I respect your point of view.
> and I expect you to do the same.
> I also respect the point of view of Rob Watts, and his company.
> I would not be here to write if I did not find their product interesting. in fact I'm waiting to try it soon, when it will be available. I have only externalized what I do not like and which I am convinced of, and I can not of course claim that it can be shared by everyone. it remains my personal critique of the product, shared or not.
> ...



I don't think that people don't like what you write it just appears to be in comparison criticism of the handling of a car based on its looks without doing a test drive.  The 2Qute is an entirely different device from my understanding when it comes to how it is powered.

In regards to the Qutest itself I am looking forward to using it with my Synology Server.  DS Audio has option to enable high quality output, but it also has checkbox for enable DSD over PCM. Qutest will not need this checked, correct?


----------



## EndGameSearch

I experienced an issue with my Hugo 2 soon after launch and my dealer immediately replaced the unit without asking me to identify the power supply I was using.  Don't hook the thing to an actual car battery and you probably do not need to worry about the warranty.  This whole conversation is an endless loop.  Chord could have shipped the Cutest with with an UpTone LPS-1 and people would have complained about the price being to high or about the PS being over kill.  Others would still want to upgrade to something even beyond that but most would be happy with the solution as shipped.  Companies have to strike a balance and offer a product suited for the largest possible audience.  Chord clearly knows what they're doing and has made their decisions accordingly.


----------



## AlexB73

Different LPS made by other company, may sound better or worse.
People don't understand how a fine tuning is important in audio. 
The developer made the fine tuning of his device with supplied PSU. 
Because that, all Chord DACs sound good with supplied PSU.
For example, my expirience, with MCRU LPS for 2qute was negative.
I read about negative experience of other guy with TeddyPardo with 2qute.
Other people like results of MCRU and TeddyPardo LPS with 2qute.
Maybe because it works different in different systems or maybe some people recognize "glass" upper mid and higt frequencies as "detailed" sound. I don't know...
The same story with AC cables. Sometime even an expensive and good AC cable can sound bad with a some specific device in a specific system.


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 21, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> Different LPS made by other company, may sound better or worse.
> People don't understand how a fine tuning is important in audio.
> The developer made the fine tuning of his device with supplied PSU.
> Because that, all Chord DACs sound good with supplied PSU.
> ...



I agree with this, I like to take the "problem solving" approach vs. the "improvement" approach. If it isn't broke don't fix it. I'm open to hearing if the improvements are or are not colorization or an actual improvement when it isn't removing, noise etc. I am relatively new to this forum but it seems the common belief is things that are more expensive make things sound better. Seems that may not be 100% of the time and somethings should be left the way the manufacturer made it.


----------



## plsvn

just grabbed one (out of two avalaible) Qutest at the local (Milan, Italy) Chord official reseller


----------



## dawktah2

Any updates on shipment to US dealers???


----------



## plsvn (Feb 21, 2018)

I’m at my girlfriend’s so could only give it a quick try in my secondary (and “just good enough”) system: Auralic Aries Mini -> Red Wine Audio Signature 15 -> Klipsch R-15M and... obviosly the difference, compared to the Aries’ internal DAC, is night and day so can’t really say how good this thing is

all I can say is:
- this amplifier doesn’t like 3v line in (changed output to 2v and all is fine) so... I’ll have to change my plan about bringing here the 2Qute at the moment in my main system 
- filters are very effective (only, very briefly, tried a couple: “incisive” and “warm”: settled on incisive)
- “bitrate light” is maybe too pale after getting used to 2Qute’s which is actually very bright indeed

next week I’ll give it a go in my main system (Roon Sever on a Mac mini -> Aries “femto” -> Audiophilleo SE -> Qutest -> Don Garber “Y” and “X” 6922 pre and 2A3 power amplifier -> Klipsch Cornwall) and report


----------



## JWahl

Moon Audio's page has been updated with availability at $1,895.  A little more than I was hoping but I suppose it could be worse.


----------



## ra990

JWahl said:


> Moon Audio's page has been updated with availability at $1,895.  A little more than I was hoping but I suppose it could be worse.


Hmmm...yea a bit high. Used Hugo 2 are going for about $2k on this forum, might be a better option?


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 21, 2018)

JWahl said:


> Moon Audio's page has been updated with availability at $1,895.  A little more than I was hoping but I suppose it could be worse.



Thanks JWahl!

A bit annoying since I signed up to be notified...and got nothing.

Why are Hugo 2 going for $2,000? Moon selling new at $2,695?!?!


----------



## agedbest

dawktah2 said:


> The 2Qute is an entirely different device from my understanding when it comes to how it is powered.




what did you apply .....when you understood


----------



## plsvn

plsvn said:


> - “bitrate light” is maybe too pale after getting used to 2Qute’s which is actually very bright indeed



just found you can change LEDs brightness: by pushing "Filter" and "Input" together it will cycle between "Low" and "High"
very appreciated new feature


----------



## 211276

I have been following this thread with a lot of interest since the launch of the Qutest was announced. I am in the UK, have had the Qutest for over a week  and it is very good.  I found that it took five days to run in.  I was previously using a Mojo and like the Chord sound.  The Mojo is now used for domestic headphone use only.  The Qutest, fed by a microRendu, has the same sound signature as the Mojo, but does everything better. Both frequency extremes are more extended and the sound stage and imaging have improved a lot.  My preamp, mono blocks, speakers, speaker cable and interconnectors are NVA and very transparent with the emphasis on information retrieval.


----------



## rettib2001

211276 said:


> I have been following this thread with a lot of interest since the launch of the Qutest was announced. I am in the UK, have had the Qutest for over a week  and it is very good.  I found that it took five days to run in.  I was previously using a Mojo and like the Chord sound.  The Mojo is now used for domestic headphone use only.  The Qutest, fed by a microRendu, has the same sound signature as the Mojo, but does everything better. Both frequency extremes are more extended and the sound stage and imaging have improved a lot.  My preamp, mono blocks, speakers, speaker cable and interconnectors are NVA and very transparent with the emphasis on information retrieval.



I read your similarly worded comment this morning on another forum that I follow,  as I have almost the exact same NVA setup as you and currently use a Mojo in the same way. I can 'almost' live with the faffing around it takes to use it as a desktop DAC,  my main drive behind changing it is the search for even better sound quality. 

Do you feel the difference in sound quality between the two is worth (very subjective I know) the significant difference in price ?


----------



## agedbest

Triode User said:


> .... It is totally unreasonable to expect a manufacturer to test other suppliers PSU and produce a list of 'approved' LPS. I'm sorry, but what planet are you on?...



as you can see it is not so totally unreasonable to expect ......

if the manufacturer is open mind

http://www.sonore.us/microRendu.html


----------



## Triode User

agedbest said:


> as you can see it is not so totally unreasonable to expect ......
> 
> if the manufacturer is open mind
> 
> http://www.sonore.us/microRendu.html



I'm still not quite sure what your point is. Are you are saying that you would buy a Qutest if Chord would recommend alternative after market PSUs for it or are just making mischief?


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 22, 2018)

Just placed my order, site says will arrive February 23rd and will ship thereafter.  Still no email...

Oh, in that unboxing I didn't see a drawstring bag...


----------



## 211276

rettib2001 said:


> I read your similarly worded comment this morning on another forum that I follow,  as I have almost the exact same NVA setup as you and currently use a Mojo in the same way. I can 'almost' live with the faffing around it takes to use it as a desktop DAC,  my main drive behind changing it is the search for even better sound quality.
> 
> Do you feel the difference in sound quality between the two is worth (very subjective I know) the significant difference in price ?



I think the improvement in SQ is worth it with an NVA set up, bearing in mind that it takes some running in.


----------



## rettib2001

211276 said:


> I think the improvement in SQ is worth it with an NVA set up, bearing in mind that it takes some running in.



Thanks, looks like I'm  going to have to get my hands on one.


----------



## agedbest

Triode User said:


> I'm still not quite sure what your point is. Are you are saying that you would buy a Qutest if Chord would recommend alternative after market PSUs for it ....




it is not possible that you have not yet understood what my point is

it is very evident, having always been "linear" 

do I have to take it for the umpteenth time? always beating on the same point?

then do not complain.

wish you a nice days


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 22, 2018)

agedbest said:


> it is not possible that you have not yet understood what my point is
> 
> it is very evident, having always been "linear"
> 
> ...



I just put in Google and this is *first result*: https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/ap...audio-myth-switching-power-supplies-are-noisy

Not that this means much but I think this power supply issue needs to be dropped...


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 22, 2018)

i believe aged best should be renamed daily beast for his pointless electrical up dates and prodding.
he seems to be trying to create diplomatic incidents with his pollution of the well and attempt too catch people out.

why not make your own dac mr marconi and power supply mr beast
and try and  best the cute 
it should be easy for an italian nikola tesla : )


----------



## agedbest

dawktah2 said:


> I just put in Google and this is *first result*: https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/ap...audio-myth-switching-power-supplies-are-noisy
> 
> Not that this means much but I think this power supply issue needs to be dropped...



you are right
a linear power is not always better ...
LPS must has toroidal, and filters too ...
and reach the need of unity
i am waiting the DAC, and some acnoledge
between very little there will be dedicated power supplies ..... and we will be spoiled for choice
MCRU has already published it, but I do not like it.
I will choose among those who will publish photos of their interior to see the components


----------



## dawktah2

Now I get the email from Moon Audio hours after I placed my order, LOL


----------



## agedbest

tony wilson said:


> ....



I'm sorry, I have nothing to sell
nor am I worried about selling anything in the future


you instead seem very worried this DAC does not sell enough, are you perhaps a Chord retailer?


----------



## agedbest

dawktah2 said:


> Now I get the email from Moon Audio hours after I placed my order, LOL




still little time ..... and then finally you have it in your hands
congrats


----------



## tony wilson

agedbest said:


> I'm sorry, I have nothing to sell
> nor am I worried about selling anything in the future
> 
> 
> you instead seem very worried this DAC does not sell enough, are you perhaps a Chord retailer?




the dealer i gave my money 2 had 2 
somehow i do not think you will be collecting your sheckles together for this cute thing. why would you you clearly have issues or should i say agenda.

for me myself i am now using the paul hynes sr4 with the cutest and the sound makes me very happy.
and look over in a drawer i have a wallwart  standard issue from every electronic company in the world made by the billion for a reason business.
personilsation via cables and power supply  cheap or expensive a choice to be made by the customer take it or leave it.



i really look forward mr oldbeast too your youtube video deconstruction controlled demolition  but since you are not buying we may be waiting a long time.


----------



## tony wilson (Feb 22, 2018)

rettib2001 said:


> I read your similarly worded comment this morning on another forum that I follow,  as I have almost the exact same NVA setup as you and currently use a Mojo in the same way. I can 'almost' live with the faffing around it takes to use it as a desktop DAC,  my main drive behind changing it is the search for even better sound quality.
> 
> Do you feel the difference in sound quality between the two is worth (very subjective I know) the significant difference in price ?








this is an expensive unit having said that mojo was probably set out spec wise 4 years ago with all the complications of it's design and price point implimentation.

this is bang up to date a basic dac it does nothing else just inputs and delivers a signal it's refinement is in it's signal processing purity.
when supply  of units becomes more fluid a home demo would be a great help for folks.

i would suggest you get hold of a unit with plenty of  hours on the clock as every day for me it gets better.
having said that i do not know if many hi fi stores offer that service?

 i just done a swap out with the mojo  and the cutest is just  all around better.

the handy thing about the mojo is  the line level voltage adjustment  great for connecting into home systems
the cutest  line voltage output  adjustment is important i use the lowest setting.


----------



## JWahl

I've placed my order for the Qutest.  I also placed an order for the iFi Nano iUSB to power the Qutest and "regen" the USB signal.

I can compare with stock if anyone is interested.  If it's not much difference, I may resell the latter.


----------



## rettib2001

tony wilson said:


> this is an expensive unit having said that mojo was probably set out spec wise 4 years ago with all the complications of it's design and price point implimentation.
> 
> this is bang up to date a basic dac it does nothing else just inputs and delivers a signal it's refinement is in it's signal processing purity.
> when supply  of units becomes more fluid a home demo would be a great help for folks.
> ...



That all sounds very promising, it's becoming clearer in my head that a straight-up DAC is exactly what I want.

There always seem to be an element of compromise when an object tries to be too many things at once. I'll keep hold of the Mojo and use it as a mobile device (which it was obviously designed to be).

Thanks for your feedback.


----------



## tony wilson

rettib2001 said:


> That all sounds very promising, it's becoming clearer in my head that a straight-up DAC is exactly what I want.
> 
> There always seem to be an element of compromise when an object tries to be too many things at once. I'll keep hold of the Mojo and use it as a mobile device (which it was obviously designed to be).
> 
> Thanks for your feedback.




i have a benchmark dac that does loads of things  all feels and looks great but i never want to use the dac as a dac
whatever the mojo was doing i liked it better.


i purchased a mojo as a toy and it turned out it to be better than any dac i had ever had and was better than the dacs in my various cd players
as i said earlier the cutest is the big brother of the mojo.it is heavy i think they could have gone even heavier.

i have been experimenting with cheap and better quality cables buying only 2nd hand on ebay and noticing big differences.  a good 75ohm coxial cable is important plenty of used good quality ones on ebay.


----------



## rettib2001

JWahl said:


> I've placed my order for the Qutest.  I also placed an order for the iFi Nano iUSB to power the Qutest and "regen" the USB signal.
> 
> I can compare with stock if anyone is interested.  If it's not much difference, I may resell the latter.



Keep us posted!  Now that I'm about to bite the bullet I'm trying to figure out if I should trust the claims of galvanic isolated USB and that USB is the preferred connection (I think this is Rob Watts's preference) or go for coax, which if I'm honest I found slightly better with the mojo, when using a high quality spdif to usb converter.

I noticed that you have an ifi ican se, which is pretty high on my shortlist of headphone amps to buy/use with the Qutest. It would be great if you had a chance to try them out together.


----------



## BenHagens (Feb 23, 2018)

JWahl said:


> I've placed my order for the Qutest.  I also placed an order for the iFi Nano iUSB to power the Qutest and "regen" the USB signal.
> 
> I can compare with stock if anyone is interested.  If it's not much difference, I may resell the latter.



The iUSB is an interesting bit of kit. I've had one for a few months now, and it's made some subtle improvements in systems I've tried it with. I currently have access to a Qutest, but haven't thought to try the iUSB with it yet! Qutest without any USB regen has been excellent though. Digging out a lot of detail and musicality. The intro to Trains (Porcupine Tree) really made me sit up and pay attention.


----------



## Rhinomyte76

Nice!  So glad there are people using the Qutest with the IFI USB 3.0  as I have a question re: setup.  Qutest is unavailable in the US currently as far a I know, but holding my breath for first opportunity.

The setup I am planning based upon the gear I currently have is:  PC-> Venom USB-> IFI USB 3.0--> IFI Genimi USB  --> Qutest --> (amp / headphones etc)

Question is, because the Qutest doesn't need power from USB, am I better off not using a double headed USB cable like the Gemini from the IFI USB 3.0?
Is all this stuff needlessly complicating the chain where the venom usb straight to the Qutest would be better in light of the galvanic isolation already present?

This may be a wait and see / trust your own ears scenario, but any insight is greatly appreciated.  Thanks!!


----------



## dawktah2

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Qutest is unavailable in the US currently as far a I know, but holding my breath for first opportunity.



Its available at Moon-Audio.com, ordered mine yesterday


----------



## JWahl

rettib2001 said:


> I noticed that you have an ifi ican se, which is pretty high on my shortlist of headphone amps to buy/use with the Qutest. It would be great if you had a chance to try them out together.



It will be my main setup for now, along with my modded HD-650.  I sold my more expensive Torpedo III DIY amp to help fund the Qutest.  From using the iCan SE with the Mojo, I feel like it should be transparent enough to let the Qutest shine through.  Eventually, I'll upgrade my headphones again, and then the amp.  If the performance of the Qutest is satisfactory, I'll probably keep it for a long time.  I've been a fan of the bigger Schiit MB DAC in the past, having owned the Gungnir MB and Yggdrasil, but they're both large and unwieldy for a convenient desktop setup.  I like what Chord is able to do with such a small footprint.  Over the years, I've started to move away from super-massive desktop setups, and I'm not really in a position where a rack based system is convenient either.



BenHagens said:


> The iUSB is an interesting bit of kit. I've had one for a few months now, and it's made some subtle improvements in systems I've tried it with. I currently have access to a Qutest, but haven't thought to try the iUSB with it yet! Qutest without any USB regen has been excellent though. Digging out a lot of detail and musicality. The intro to Trains (Porcupine Tree) really made me sit up and pay attention.



I don't anticipate a huge if any improvement with the iUSB, it's more curiosity on my part.  Someone else had claimed improvement's on the Dave with it, so who knows.   I had the full size one briefly with the Mojo, when I used it with a higher end setup that I downgraded from.  It had decent results with the Mojo, but the Mojo lacks galvanic isolation.   The full sized iUSB seemed kind of silly to use with the Mojo though, so I sold it.



Rhinomyte76 said:


> Nice!  So glad there are people using the Qutest with the IFI USB 3.0  as I have a question re: setup.  Qutest is unavailable in the US currently as far a I know, but holding my breath for first opportunity.
> 
> The setup I am planning based upon the gear I currently have is:  PC-> Venom USB-> IFI USB 3.0--> IFI Genimi USB  --> Qutest --> (amp / headphones etc)
> 
> ...



The Qutest is currently available in the U.S. from at least Moon Audio, TTVJ Audio, and The Cable Company.  There may be others by now as well.  I think yesterday was the official U.S. release.

If you already have the Gemini cable and the full size iUSB, it can't hurt to try.  To me though, it would seem very unwieldy.   I'll be using 2 1-foot USB cables with the Qutest, a braided Anker micro-USB from power-only to 5v input, and a generic Tripp Lite USB-B from the power/signal port to the USB input of the Qutest.  The downside to having multiple boxes doing different things is that cable management can get quite messy.


----------



## agedbest

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Nice!  So glad there are people using the Qutest with the IFI USB 3.0  as I have a question re: setup.  Qutest is unavailable in the US currently as far a I know, but holding my breath for first opportunity.
> 
> The setup I am planning based upon the gear I currently have is:  PC-> Venom USB-> IFI USB 3.0--> IFI Genimi USB  --> Qutest --> (amp / headphones etc)
> 
> ...




the main problem is the recognition of the device.

if there are no problems in recognizing the device using only 2 data cables, it can be done.

you should also see the Chord driver ... but the main problem is the recognition of the device on the O.S. installed on your PC


----------



## BLacklWf

Rob Watts said:


> .



Hi Rob,

Why do you charge U.S. Customers $500 more than U.K. Customers?  U.K. price is £1195 with VAT.  So, UK price isis £956 without VAT, which translates under $1400.  But, U.S. price is $1895.  A hefty $500 of difference.  VAT does not apply on exports to non-EU countries.  I understand Chord is a UK company, but doesn't Chord derive the biggest revenue from U.S. anyway?  The logistics and operational costs should be about same or lower in US due to the volume here.  I can do nothing about it, but knowing such a big difference exist is my biggest obstacle in purchasing Qutest. 

Here is an excerpt from Gov.UK website on VAT:
*VAT on exports to non-EU countries*
VAT is a tax on goods used in the EU, so if goods are exported outside the EU, VAT isn’t charged. You can zero-rate the sale, provided you get and keep evidence of the export, and comply with all other laws. You must also make sure the goods are exported, and you must get the evidence, within three months from the time of sale. This can be longer for goods that need processing before export and for thoroughbred racehorses.


----------



## Triode User

BLacklWf said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> Why do you charge U.S. Customers $500 more than U.K. Customers?  U.K. price is £1195 with VAT.  So, UK price isis £956 without VAT, which translates under $1400.  But, U.S. price is $1895.  A hefty $500 of difference.  VAT does not apply on exports to non-EU countries.  I understand Chord is a UK company, but doesn't Chord derive the biggest revenue from U.S. anyway?  The logistics and operational costs should be about same or lower in US due to the volume here.  I can do nothing about it, but knowing such a big difference exist is my biggest obstacle in purchasing Qutest.
> 
> ...



Rob is a separate consultant who designs a lot of Chord kit. He is not Chord so cut him some slack. 

This gripe pops up on a regular basis and has been done to death several times. However if you do find a solution then please make sure it works both ways because we in the uk always have to pay at least the same ukp as the dollar price and often much more for USA stuff bought over here. I suggest you look back over old posts rather than reiterate the same stuff again.


----------



## BLacklWf

Triode User said:


> Rob is a separate consultant who designs a lot of Chord kit. He is not Chord so cut him some slack.
> 
> This gripe pops up on a regular basis and has been done to death several times. However if you do find a solution then please make sure it works both ways because we in the uk always have to pay at least the same ukp as the dollar price and often much more for USA stuff bought over here. I suggest you look back over old posts rather than reiterate the same stuff again.



Sorry Rob - I thought you were with Chord!

Triode - On theory about everything should be 12-20% more expensive in UK vs US.  In US sales tax goes as high as 8% but many online purchases are still 0%.  But, in UK or Europe, there is about 20% added on top of everything!  Also, we don't even include the sales taxes in price, but you guys to.  So, about EVERYTHING is at least 20% more expensive in UK/Europe.  On top of it, UK/Europe charges import taxes on many things.  Sweet governments you guys have..

Well to make you feel a little better, at least VAT goes to your governments.  In US, you pay 7-8% sales tax at a restaurant, a deli, or a small grocery shop - many times it's just extra 7-8% tip.  They pretty much don't pay anything in income taxes - they usually report half or less of the total income.  The sales tax?  It's just a tip.


----------



## JWahl

In all fairness, it's the North American distributor that's setting those prices, not Chord directly.  Though, there is some tacit approval given that Chord prevents UK dealers from selling outside of their distribution region.

In the future, I'd love to see Chord work with Massdrop as a distribution channel, even if that carries a caveat of limited warranty support.  That would also provide competition to the NA distributor and encourage them to price the products more competitively.  More and more big names are collaborating with them, Sennheiser, Focal, Fostex, Cavalli, Grace, etc.

Then, if you want to pay extra for the assurance of continued warranty support and post-sale service, you can go the traditional dealer/distributor route.

If you just want the product at the lowest possible price, and only care that it works out of the box, you can take the Massdrop route.


----------



## Triode User (Feb 23, 2018)

JWahl said:


> In all fairness, it's the North American distributor that's setting those prices, not Chord directly.  Though, there is some tacit approval given that Chord prevents UK dealers from selling outside of their distribution region.
> 
> In the future, I'd love to see Chord work with Massdrop as a distribution channel, even if that carries a caveat of limited warranty support.  That would also provide competition to the NA distributor and encourage them to price the products more competitively.  More and more big names are collaborating with them, Sennheiser, Focal, Fostex, Cavalli, Grace, etc.
> 
> ...



I don’t know how it works in USA but in the uk I don’t think it is possible for manufactures or distributors or basically whoever sells it to opt out of their liability for product warranty.


----------



## JWahl (Feb 23, 2018)

Triode User said:


> I don’t know how it works in USA but in the uk I don’t think it is possible for manufactures or distributors or basically whoever sells it to opt out of their liability for product warranty.


I should have clarified, something like a minimum 30 day warranty to make everything works out of the box.  I was a little vague there.  Honestly, I'm not 100% sure what the laws are like on that here.  The U.S. in general tends to have rather weak consumer protection law relative to the rest of the world.  But in this case, I don't mind.  Most modern electronics boards are assembled with such high levels of quality control, that barring misuse or components like batteries, they will last many years (as in 20 to 30) if they last the first 30 days.


----------



## VintageFlanker (Feb 24, 2018)

BLacklWf said:


> Sweet governments you guys have..



Irrevelent. You probably don't understand why taxes exist. Living in France, I'm glad to have the opportunity to go to the hospital and don't pay any cent for seeking treatment...

Anyway,

Back to prices in EU vs US: there are many others things to consider but taxes... shipping fees first, and an importer will seek for a margin of profit.

Qutest is arrived in stock and I will received mine next week.


----------



## panditji

BLacklWf said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> Why do you charge U.S. Customers $500 more than U.K. Customers?  U.K. price is £1195 with VAT.  So, UK price isis £956 without VAT, which translates under $1400.  But, U.S. price is $1895.  A hefty $500 of difference.  VAT does not apply on exports to non-EU countries.  I understand Chord is a UK company, but doesn't Chord derive the biggest revenue from U.S. anyway?  The logistics and operational costs should be about same or lower in US due to the volume here.  I can do nothing about it, but knowing such a big difference exist is my biggest obstacle in purchasing Qutest.
> 
> ...



It's because the US has customs duty, shipping fees and the fact that the importer would have to order in bulk (cost of capital) which would be extra from the UK costs... It's the same with many countries all over the world including India where the Chord prices are far more expensive than in the US even though the above costs are applicable to both countries....


----------



## agedbest

BLacklWf said:


> Why do you charge U.S. Customers $500 more than U.K. Customers?  U.K. price is £1195 with VAT.  So, UK price isis £956 without VAT, which translates under $1400.  But, U.S. price is $1895.  A hefty $500 of difference.  VAT does not apply on exports to non-EU countries.  I understand Chord is a UK company, but doesn't Chord derive the biggest revenue from U.S. anyway?  The logistics and operational costs should be about same or lower in US due to the volume here.  I can do nothing about it, but knowing such a big difference exist is my biggest obstacle in purchasing Qutest.



Hi BLacklWf,
Chord is not Sony, just think that they write by hand on the packaging, so a handmade reality. If it had a structure like Sony, US prices would be lower than the rest of the world.
Chord has no offices in the world, not having an office, warehouse, etc. in US, their products are managed by importers, perhaps even small.
so it is the importer who bears the costs of transport and import (I agree with you, these are little thing, you could do it yourself), also must manage the support and replacement, in the first immediate period, then they ship to Chord for replacement by warranty. but also this is not exorbitant, but this has a cost that requires a minimum of capital, investment, that is justified the recharge, it is up to you to judge.

It must be said that the taxes are applied in% of the price that the importer negotiates with Chord, which is certainly lower than the list price excluding VAT, local tax that does not apply for exports, and custom duties apply if there are no different relationships between the two nations, but I think that for this type of products there are no tariffs for both, or low duty tarif, but not sure, you can try to see Custom for it, if you need to know exactly.

so more than Chord, you should ask to its national importers/dealers for an explanation.

I can tell you that even in the EU it is managed in exactly same way, with prices that vary from country to country. so it is not Chord that makes the price, but its importers, they must only take care that its customers can not find it cheaper to buy directly in the UK (UK price + shipping). also the product warranty varies from country to country, in US I think it is 1 year, in EU 2 years by law, in UK only Chord settles 3 years.

As far as I am concerned, it would be cheaper to buy it in the UK the next time I go to London.


----------



## OK-Guy

getting back to the product...


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 24, 2018)

For those who currently own a Chord DAC and looking to the Qutest I have a question. Those of us who remember the first decade of the CD may remember the disc designation AAD, ADD and DDD.

Help if I'm not asking question right. Has anyone noticed if audio quality and quantity and the soundstage from FPGA decoding changes based on how much analog to digital conversion has been done to source?

Others have spoken to recent use of compression, just wondering how this influences things?

Do AAD recordings potentially sound better than DDD?


----------



## dac64 (Feb 24, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> Do AAD recordings potentially sound better than DDD?



People at headfi blu 2 can answer this question better

And i suspect aad is better. This is especially true for classical music


----------



## Deftone

BLacklWf said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> Why do you charge U.S. Customers $500 more than U.K. Customers?  U.K. price is £1195 with VAT.  So, UK price isis £956 without VAT, which translates under $1400.  But, U.S. price is $1895.  A hefty $500 of difference.  VAT does not apply on exports to non-EU countries.  I understand Chord is a UK company, but doesn't Chord derive the biggest revenue from U.S. anyway?  The logistics and operational costs should be about same or lower in US due to the volume here.  I can do nothing about it, but knowing such a big difference exist is my biggest obstacle in purchasing Qutest.
> 
> ...



You know if you wanted to buy a Schiit Yggdrasil it would cost you $2,399 

If i wanted to buy a Schiit Yggdrasil in the UK it would cost me $3,090

Stop complaining.


----------



## AlexB73

How much bits or voltage levels is Pulse array 10-element design equivalent?


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 24, 2018)

dac64 said:


> People at headfi blu 2 can answer this question better
> 
> And i suspect aad is better. This is especially true for classical music



Thanks, I'm  just trying to decide if to rip everything or just start with AAD then to ADD (which was rare), save DDD for last. Maybe even leave some on disc since Qutest has dual BNC.


----------



## Skampmeister

Hopefully they be available in Australia this coming week. Just got a pair of LCD-X’s and a Mytek Brooklyn+ is looking tempting over the Qutest.


----------



## jayz (Feb 25, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> For those who currently own a Chord DAC and looking to the Qutest I have a question. Those of us who remember the first decade of the CD may remember the disc designation AAD, ADD and DDD.
> 
> Help if I'm not asking question right. Has anyone noticed if audio quality and quantity and the soundstage from FPGA decoding changes based on how much analog to digital conversion has been done to source?
> 
> ...



This is a good question. As @dac64 says, a blu2/mscaler can potentially have a big impact.

In general though, I suspect there is no one right answer as there are many things at play - it could depend on each recording, ADC technology at the time and our own individual preferences. At replay time, even with the most advanced DAC technology available today, we would only be addressing weaknesses of digital conversion continuous signal to/from discrete time. In my case I find background hiss, tape vow and flutter, vinyl pops, frequency roll off at extremes, all affect my enjoyment no matter how well the music is captured.

I would rip them all and see - cannot think of a way to prioritize, I usually first do tracks I don't mind listening to frequently.


----------



## AlexB73

Hi Rob,

Can you explain how does Pulse array work?
How much bits or voltage levels is Pulse array 10-element design equivalent?

Regards,
Alex


----------



## AlexB73 (Feb 25, 2018)

I have been in Montreal audio fest last year.
I wanted to listen Chord DACs, but Cord room in Montreal was disaster.
The worst was speackers instalation with Chord Dave, Blue2 and Chord amplifier.
The sound was so bad that nobody can stay in this room more than one minute. The reason were Spendor D9 speakers. I like Spendor speakers. I had Spendor 2/3. But it is something wrong with D9. Why they didn't do installation with fantastic Spendor SP100? Why did they choose D9?
The nextdoor room was a Harbeth room with much less expensive Rega electronic. But sound was much better compared to Chord-Spendor room.
The selection of headphones wasn't good too. But steel HiFi Man 560 wasn't good match for Dave. I think Dave deserves something like HEK. Hugo2 was connected to Audioquest Nighthawk. I think Nighthawk can't show all advantages of Hugo2.
I hope to listen a good sound in the Chord room in Montreal show this year.


----------



## Rob Watts

AlexB73 said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> Can you explain how does Pulse array work?
> How much bits or voltage levels is Pulse array 10-element design equivalent?
> ...



Take a look at the video Chord put together:
https://chordelectronics.co.uk/technology-explained/chord-dac-video/

The example shown there is 10e pulse array, but is of course simplified.

The bit depth is more complex - the OP from the noise shaper truncator is 7 bits - but the feedback path back to the noise shaper from the actual pulse array elements without overload bits is 4 bits at 104MHz for a 10e pulse array.


----------



## AlexB73

Rob Watts said:


> Take a look at the video Chord put together:
> https://chordelectronics.co.uk/technology-explained/chord-dac-video/
> 
> The example shown there is 10e pulse array, but is of course simplified.
> ...


Thank you!


----------



## jcn3

dawktah2 said:


> Thanks, I'm  just trying to decide if to rip everything or just start with AAD then to ADD (which was rare), save DDD for last. Maybe even leave some on disc since Qutest has dual BNC.



the convention represents the provenance of the recording, not the quality.  as always, the engineering and mastering tend to make the most difference in the actual sound.


----------



## AlexB73

The interesting test, especially for Hi-Res fanboys.
http://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf


----------



## emrelights1973

10 trillion items are cheaper in US vs Europe,there won’t be enough internet space if Europeans start to compare prices and complain about it,  so enough of bitching and moaning! Move on....


----------



## jayz (Feb 27, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> The interesting test, especially for Hi-Res fanboys.
> http://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf



Great, even formatted to look like a serious research paper but no equipment details mentioned - perhaps the DACs were made by Nyquist and Shannon themselves?  Does this summary also mean (assume) all DACs sound the same because otherwise the test setup itself would be wrong as it would be trying to measure with two separate uncalibrated equipment in the path. In this case it could simply be that neither DAC is resolving enough to reveal differences. Or maybe the test subjects were untrained, not sensitive enough or simply tired - see this great post from Rob on the difficulties in Listening. https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/#post-12457933 

I am no fan of hi-res but firmly believe it when Rob explains we have some way to go in the (scientific) understanding of how our ear / brain interprets sound. We already know that going up sampling depth/rate we are heading on a journey of diminishing returns - nothing magical about that. Therefore, I will reserve  judgement until we have *proper* scientific proof revealing what the limit of our brain's auditory capabilities are.

Apologies for going off topic in the Qutest thread.


----------



## PHC1

AlexB73 said:


> The interesting test, especially for Hi-Res fanboys.
> http://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf


The recording/mastering of the music itself is much more important than the resolution it is presented in. Turd in, turd out, just in higher resolution. Nothing new here as there are plenty of tests online where one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between various resolution recordings with the best gear you have to listen with.


----------



## PHC1

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.


----------



## dawktah2

PHC1 said:


> They say a picture is worth a thousand words.



Looks like as soon as things went digital people got lazy.


----------



## dawktah2

Received an email saying Qutest was not shipped to supplier...

What?


----------



## JWahl

dawktah2 said:


> Received an email saying Qutest was not shipped to supplier...
> 
> What?



Same here. I'm guessing maybe UK domestic demand ate up all the stock and they have to wait for more?  I'm bummed too.


----------



## XERO1 (Feb 27, 2018)

PHC1 said:


> They say a picture is worth a thousand words.


This chart is more-or-less accurate.  But surprisingly, over the past 5 years, things have started to get better.  There's still a long way to go, but at least things are starting to head in the right direction for a change.


----------



## Skampmeister

I just picked my up from the shop just now.


----------



## dmance

I think Qutest's got delayed 3-4 weeks in the US.  At least that's what my dealer told me
Grrr


----------



## Skampmeister (Feb 28, 2018)

I’ll get straight to the point. ‘
I’ve owned a 2qute since it was released, used on a system with a pair or bowers & Wilkins 805D3’s, a system I know exceptionally well, so well any minor detail that changes, I’ll know, whether I’m looking for them or not.
Tonight, after getting the Qutest this afternoon, I set it up, and walked away from it, being that that time is not the best time to evaluate anything.
Tonight, I played the 192k “Do you remember me” by Neil diamond, probably one of the best tracks and recordings ever made, imo of course.

Well , if your on the fence about this dac, don’t be, the Qutest wiped the floor over the 2qute. In every way shape or form, and I wasn’t expecting it too. I’m not one to fool myself and I’m always skeptical with these kinds of things

So Rob Watts. You are a Champion.

Cheers.


----------



## andromeda1954

I have the Qutest now for a week. It sounds just unbelievable just out of de box .I can indeed confirm that it is a big step forward compared to the Qute2 that I also have. I think Qutest sounds even better than the Hugo 2, which I also tried, but I have returned because I think it’ sounds not better than the Qute2 with Sbootser. The next thing  I will try out is the Qutest with the Sbooster v5 ,which i have ordered .


----------



## Skampmeister

Agree, I tried a Hugo2 on my System for a night, hated it. This Qutest took one song, first song I heard. Done Deal.


----------



## azabu

Ordered! looking forward to my first Chord.


----------



## VintageFlanker




----------



## dmance

VintageFlanker said:


>


"Good Morning Dave..."


----------



## AlexB73

PHC1 said:


> The recording/mastering of the music itself is much more important than the resolution it is presented in. Turd in, turd out, just in higher resolution. Nothing new here as there are plenty of tests online where one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between various resolution recordings with the best gear you have to listen with.


I'm agree. 
The same happens with today's LP reissues.
Some of them sound realy good. But the bigger part of these reissues sound bad, even some of them made by audiofile companies.
For example, 45 RPM Analog Productions Cannonball Adderley "Somethin' Else" sounds like MP3. I have this record reissue from 70s that sounds 1000 times better. Ironically I have other reissues made by Analog Productions that sound very good. For me buying these new remastered reissues lake a gambling. Even reading feedbacks in interned doesn't help.


----------



## dcp10

Rob (if you are there):

Do you have any comments on the sound quality of the Qutest versus the Hugo 2 please? (I'm assuming the two devices have the same circuit board - is this correct?)

I'm on the fence between getting a Qutest or a Hugo 2. I do have a separate headphone amp, but might use the Hugo 2 for (limited) portable listening. However, my prime consideration is audio quality. So, which should sound better: Hugo 2 or Qutest - or should they sound the same?

Many thanks!


----------



## dac64 (Feb 28, 2018)

dcp10 said:


> Rob (if you are there):
> 
> Do you have any comments on the sound quality of the Qutest versus the Hugo 2 please? (I'm assuming the two devices have the same circuit board - is this correct?)
> 
> ...


Rob said that both were sharing the same four layers  circuit board. Implicitly  Implied that both will sound the same.

Ok, there could be slight difference, signal of   H2 will pass through a volume digital control.


----------



## andromeda1954

dcp10 said:


> Rob (if you are there):
> 
> Do you have any comments on the sound quality of the Qutest versus the Hugo 2 please? (I'm assuming the two devices have the same circuit board - is this correct?)
> 
> ...


The Qutest with a good amp sound better than the Hugo 2. I tried both. There are other people here who experienced the same


----------



## Skampmeister

Yup, if not using for portable use, forget the Hugo2.


----------



## dawktah2 (Feb 28, 2018)

I'm just wondering if the "price" will change along with this delivery snafu...

WHOA!  Qutest is 770g but Hugo 2 is 450g.

Another unboxing...  U.S. needs to get it together...


----------



## Rob Watts

dcp10 said:


> Rob (if you are there):
> 
> Do you have any comments on the sound quality of the Qutest versus the Hugo 2 please? (I'm assuming the two devices have the same circuit board - is this correct?)
> 
> ...



They are not identical circuit boards, but share common circuitry and identical audio code on the FPGA - although the output stage is much more advanced with Hugo 2 as it has the more difficult task of driving headphones directly.

In my opinion if it's a case of driving headphones then Hugo 2 easily out performs Qutest with a seperate headphone amp both sonically and for sure measurement wise. But some like the sound of their amps and will of course disagree with me; and that's OK.


----------



## dcp10

andromeda1954 said:


> The Qutest with a good amp sound better than the Hugo 2. I tried both. There are other people here who experienced the same



I'm getting the same vibes: Qutest seems to be getting excellent reviews, whereas the Hugo 2 had fairly mixed reviews. I don't know whether this is simply because the Qutest is cheaper and therefore the expectations were lower - and of course there was a big price jump between the Hugo 1 and Hugo 2 - or whether there really is a significant difference.

It's important to be objective here. I'm not interested in the galvanic isolation of the Qutest - I shall be using the coaxial input predominantly - in which case, surely, the two devices should sound the same? If anything, I might expect the Hugo 2 to sound better because of its battery power? Any theories as to why Qutest would sound better?!

So, let me rephrase my original request to Rob: 

Rob: as far as the coaxial inputs are concerned, would we expect any sound differences between Qutest and Hugo 2? If so, which is better from a purely audio standpoint please?


----------



## dcp10

Rob Watts said:


> They are not identical circuit boards, but share common circuitry and identical audio code on the FPGA - although the output stage is much more advanced with Hugo 2 as it has the more difficult task of driving headphones directly.
> 
> In my opinion if it's a case of driving headphones then Hugo 2 easily out performs Qutest with a seperate headphone amp both sonically and for sure measurement wise. But some like the sound of their amps and will of course disagree with me; and that's OK.




Thanks Rob - sorry, your reply crossed with my message - apologies.


----------



## Skampmeister

Female vocals has improved immensely over the 2qute. This DAC has more backbone.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Have had the Qutest for more than a week now and the LTA MZ2 just came in today for me to throw in some comments.

Am using the SOTM SMS-200 out to Qutest. MZ2 as preamp to drive the First Watt F7. The LPS-1 is powering the SMS-200 and ISO Regen.

Hearing a very coherent and smooth presentation. No frequency jumps at me in particular. Very transparent with great clarity and timing. This is quite a gem of a DAC. Tiny but packs a real punch.


----------



## andromeda1954

dcp10 said:


> I'm getting the same vibes: Qutest seems to be getting excellent reviews, whereas the Hugo 2 had fairly mixed reviews. I don't know whether this is simply because the Qutest is cheaper and therefore the expectations were lower - and of course there was a big price jump between the Hugo 1 and Hugo 2 - or whether there really is a significant difference.
> 
> It's important to be objective here. I'm not interested in the galvanic isolation of the Qutest - I shall be using the coaxial input predominantly - in which case, surely, the two devices should sound the same? If anything, I might expect the Hugo 2 to sound better because of its battery power? Any theories as to why Qutest would sound better?!
> 
> ...





dcp10 said:


> Thanks Rob - sorry, your reply crossed with my message - apologies.


Between the Qute2 and Hugo there is also difference in sound. Many have the experience that the Qute2 sounds better than Hugo and that now seems to be the case again.The Qutest as DAC just sounds better than the Hugo2 used as DAC.My ears don’t lie and even my supplier has the same opinion .So if you don’t need a portable amp  buy the Qutest it just sounds amazing.


----------



## Skampmeister

Like I’ve already said, I’ve had both on my system, and after the Qutest, you couldn’t give me a Hugo2.


----------



## Light - Man

Good to finally get some strong opinions by those who have the neck to do so and therefore deserve some *thumbs up* from us?! .........................................


----------



## dac64 (Mar 1, 2018)

Joe-Siow said:


> The LPS-1 is powering the SMS-200 and ISO Regen.



How does qutest sounds without the regen?


----------



## Taylor_

Is this DAC something you would use with a headphone amplifier like "Violectric HPA V281". Or should i look for another DAC for the amp? 

**Noob question? First post here **


----------



## andromeda1954

Taylor_ said:


> Is this DAC something you would use with a headphone amplifier like "Violectric HPA V281". Or should i look for another DAC for the amp?
> 
> **Noob question? First post here **


I Have de Violectric V281also and I can tell you it is a great match .


----------



## thiepval68

Taylor_ said:


> Is this DAC something you would use with a headphone amplifier like "Violectric HPA V281". Or should i look for another DAC for the amp?
> 
> **Noob question? First post here **


Using qutest with V200 onto hd800.....outstanding


----------



## Light - Man

Taylor_ said:


> Is this DAC something you would use with a headphone amplifier like "Violectric HPA V281". Or should i look for another DAC for the amp?
> 
> **Noob question? First post here **



Very good question for a Noob but only one for a Noob with deeper pockets! 

P.S. Hope it is warmer in Sweden that it is in these parts!!!


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Taylor_ said:


> Is this DAC something you would use with a headphone amplifier like "Violectric HPA V281". Or should i look for another DAC for the amp?
> 
> **Noob question? First post here **


Should be a great match, I`m planning to do the same.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Rob Watts said:


> They are not identical circuit boards, but share common circuitry and identical audio code on the FPGA - although the output stage is much more advanced with Hugo 2 as it has the more difficult task of driving headphones directly.
> 
> In my opinion if it's a case of driving headphones then Hugo 2 easily out performs Qutest with a seperate headphone amp both sonically and for sure measurement wise. But some like the sound of their amps and will of course disagree with me; and that's OK.


I think initial question was in comparison of Qutest and Hugo2 used as DACs. I understand that integrated solution like Hugo could have it`s benefits (shorter signal path, good volume regulation implementation and so on) against separate amp+DAC system. But if we take Hugo2 and Qutest and use them as DACs for an external amp, would those two sound exactly the same?


----------



## Skampmeister

I don’t need Robs opinion on this, no offense  I’ve heard it myself and others have also testified, they are different, as was the 2Qute and the Hugo. 

IMO the Hugo is research for the Qute range


----------



## andromeda1954

Ragnar-BY said:


> I think initial question was in comparison of Qutest and Hugo2 used as DACs. I understand that integrated solution like Hugo could have it`s benefits (shorter signal path, good volume regulation implementation and so on) against separate amp+DAC system. But if we take Hugo2 and Qutest and use them as DACs for an external amp, would those two sound exactly the same?


I think your question was already answered. De Qutest sounds better.


----------



## Skampmeister

Plus it’s a way nicer piece of kit aesthetically also.


----------



## Joe-Siow

dac64 said:


> How does qutest sounds without the regen?



The Qutest sounds more open and slightly richer with the ISO Regen. Background is also blacker and quieter, allowing more details to surface as a result.


----------



## Zachik

Taylor_ said:


> Is this DAC something you would use with a headphone amplifier like "Violectric HPA V281". Or should i look for another DAC for the amp?
> 
> **Noob question? First post here **



Since no one else has, let me extended the customary:
Welcome to Head-Fi, and sorry for your wallet


----------



## Deftone

Skampmeister said:


> Like I’ve already said, I’ve had both on my system, and after the Qutest, you couldn’t give me a Hugo2.



Lol, you know if you were running both into your amp they’re almost identical ?


----------



## Skampmeister

No their not. But what’s the point in arguing


----------



## dac64

Joe-Siow said:


> The Qutest sounds more open and slightly richer with the ISO Regen. Background is also blacker and quieter, allowing more details to surface as a result.



Thanks for the prompt reply!

Just happened that i had a USB Regen. Will try after i have received the qutest.


----------



## agedbest

Joe-Siow said:


> The Qutest sounds more open and slightly richer with the ISO Regen. Background is also blacker and quieter, allowing more details to surface as a result.



Thanks for reply

that's another interesting information to must known...
so USB galvanic isolation is a chimera
what kind of USB regen are you connecting?


----------



## dmance

agedbest said:


> ...
> so USB galvanic isolation is a chimera...


I plan to continue to use my USB chain of MP-U1 battery, intona and 15 ferrites with Qutest. I don't think you can ever have enough protection from RFI/EMI.


----------



## Joe-Siow

agedbest said:


> Thanks for reply
> 
> that's another interesting information to must known...
> so USB galvanic isolation is a chimera
> what kind of USB regen are you connecting?



Am using the Uptone ISO Regen

https://uptoneaudio.com/products/iso-regen


----------



## VintageFlanker (Mar 4, 2018)

agedbest said:


> so USB galvanic isolation is a chimera



It's not.

Trust me, I owned MANY DACs these lasts years and almost all of them took, more or less, audible noise from my computer via the USB input (worst case: Nuprime DAC-9). This noise was very audible in my MA Silver 10 tweeters, less with headphones.

The Qutest is DEAD SILENT pluged in USB on my system, and this is the first DAC I own to work that way.


----------



## Skampmeister

One thing I can confirm, even thought the 2qute was 3v and the highest setting on the Qutest is 3v, the Qutest is running higher voltage than the 2qute. I’ve been running the same system for years with the 2qute with zero overloading issues, but I have them very rarely on the Qutest now, had to switch it to 2v to solve the issue, and even at 2v, it’s practically the same volume the 2qute was when it was 3v.


----------



## VintageFlanker

Skampmeister said:


> One thing I can confirm, even thought the 2qute was 3v and the highest setting on the Qutest is 3v, the Qutest is running higher voltage than the 2qute. I’ve been running the same system for years with the 2qute with zero overloading issues, but I have them very rarely on the Qutest now, had to switch it to 2v to solve the issue, and even at 2v, it’s practically the same volume the 2qute was when it was 3v.



Interesting.

I was also wondering which voltage I should use. I'm OK with the 2V but found the 3V brought a little more life but maybe was seeming to be overloaded.


----------



## Skampmeister

@VintageFlanker yes, you are correct, a hotter signal can sound more exciting, but if you dig deeper into the sound, it’s bordering on overload. I heard this with my Mytek Brooklyn+ which is stupidly hot with its signal, you have to turn it down -6db to get it normal.


----------



## elviscaprice

VintageFlanker said:


> It's not.
> 
> Trust me, I owned MANY DACs these lasts years and almost all of them took, more or less, audible noise from my computer via the USB input (worst case: Nuprime DAC-9). This noise was very audible in my MA Silver 10 tweeters, less with headphones.
> 
> The Qutest is DEAD SILENT pluged in USB on my system, and this is the first DAC I own to work that way.



There's far more going on with digital streamed audio that effects SQ of the DAC than just GI.  Thus my incorporation of as much clean power and clocking of the initiation and continuation of the audio stream.  This is already an accepted given regardless of DAC implementation, including DAVE.  

The ISO Regen is a good start to clean power and reclocking, but there is better.


----------



## elviscaprice

If anyone getting the Qutest is directly driving their efficient speakers with the Qutest and did so before with the 2Qute, would love to hear your impressions.


----------



## Leogaluc666

Sorry if it's off topic but, what can I expect sound wise if I grab a qutest coming from a Sony WM1A ?

If someone had or currently own both I would appreciate the comparison.

Thanks.


----------



## Skampmeister

Leogaluc666 said:


> coming from a Sony WM1A



In one word, maturity.


----------



## Christer

I was impressed enough by Qutest to buy one today in Singapore.
On its own it is neither a DAVE nor a DAVE/Blu2.But a very clear upgrade from HUGO1.


----------



## U2nite

Christer said:


> I was impressed enough by Qutest to buy one today in Singapore.
> On its own it is neither a DAVE nor a DAVE/Blu2.But a very clear upgrade from HUGO1.



Christer, Congratulations.  Can you share where you bought from in Singapore. Who has stock?

Cheers.


----------



## Chiswickian

I'm loving my Qutest.  While the high-res stuffs sound amazing.  What I'm probably most impressed with is the amount of detail and how good my relatively low bit rate 320k mp3's sound.


----------



## Skampmeister

I’ve been comparing my New Mytek Brooklyn Plus and the Qutest over the last few days, and on my system, the Brooklyn is winning by a nose. I dont like this news, I’d prefer to prefer the Chord.


----------



## Christer

U2nite said:


> Christer, Congratulations.  Can you share where you bought from in Singapore. Who has stock?
> 
> Cheers.



AV One at the Adelphi.
Not sure if they have more stock. But they have a demo unit.


----------



## AlexB73

Can anybody to write sdetailed review about Qutest?
I'm interested in Qutest comparison to 2qute, Hugo TT and Hugo2.


----------



## U2nite

Christer said:


> AV One at the Adelphi.
> Not sure if they have more stock. But they have a demo unit.



Christer, noted. Thanks.


----------



## Joe-Siow

AlexB73 said:


> Can anybody to write sdetailed review about Qutest?
> I'm interested in Qutest comparison to 2qute, Hugo TT and Hugo2.



I doubt many forumers have a 2Qute, Hugo TT and Hugo 2 lying around to compare them against the Qutest, but one can always hope


----------



## sandalaudio

Just bought mine and very happy with it.

I used to use QuteHD but wasn't too keen on the 2Qute so moved on to iFi micro iDAC2 instead, but now I'm back to the Chord camp once again.

As the flashy rainbow light suggests, the sound is quite mesmerizing...


----------



## Juko

Skampmeister said:


> Agree, I tried a Hugo2 on my System for a night, hated it. This Qutest took one song, first song I heard. Done Deal.



Which input do you use ? If you are using usb this might be the reason for preferring Cutest over Hugo 2. As Cutest has got galvanic isolation and its a great benefit of course.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Juko I was using Coax.


----------



## Juko

Skampmeister said:


> @Juko I was using Coax.



Ok, that´s interesting. Thanks


----------



## hifipassion

Hi, 
@Skampmeister : Could you please share with us what coax cable have you used with Qutest ?
And what micro usb cable you use for the power?
Personally I found these to make a great difference...


----------



## Skampmeister

@hifipassion i used to stock power supply cable and a Clearer audio Silver-Line 75 coax.


----------



## hifipassion

In my opinion, the stock one cannot give great results.
Powered from a IfI Micro iUSB 3.0, the Qutest gets things to another level.
And getting a factory made BNC cable (like Audioquest Diamond, without adapters from coax I mean) could improve things further.
For me, in order to have the biggest jump in quality,  you need these factors:
- quality power source
- quality micro usb used for power
- quality USB cable or BNC
- quality transport
- quality interconnect


----------



## maxh22

sandalaudio said:


> Just bought mine and very happy with it.
> 
> I used to use QuteHD but wasn't too keen on the 2Qute so moved on to iFi micro iDAC2 instead, but now I'm back to the Chord camp once again.
> 
> As the flashy rainbow light suggests, the sound is quite mesmerizing...



Can you do a short comparison between H2 and Qutest?

Do you hear any difference between the two of them?


----------



## adrian.clopotari

hifipassion said:


> In my opinion, the stock one cannot give great results.
> Powered from a IfI Micro iUSB 3.0, the Qutest gets things to another level.
> And getting a factory made BNC cable (like Audioquest Diamond, without adapters from coax I mean) could improve things further.
> For me, in order to have the biggest jump in quality, you need these factors:
> ...




For the average consumer, does all that cable stuff make a real difference? If yes, than what %?

Cause I belive you are talking from the point of view of someone who has real fine years.

To me, from the point of view of the average music consumer, its way more important to have good speakers and good room isolation.

I certanly cant hear any difference between a 100$ cable and a 10$ cable.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## daredevil_kk

Anyone with Aurender N10 experiencing dropout with the Qutest on the Coax? I don't have any problem with the USB input.



Skampmeister said:


> @hifipassion i used to stock power supply cable and a Clearer audio Silver-Line 75 coax.


CA coax... good choice...


----------



## hifipassion (Mar 6, 2018)

adrian.clopotari said:


> For the average consumer, does all that cable stuff make a real difference? If yes, than what %?
> 
> Cause I belive you are talking from the point of view of someone who has real fine years.
> 
> ...



You forgot the "clean power" 
It's true that some companies are selling "not-so-great" entry-level cables at $100 that sound sometimes worse than a $10 stock cable.
While this forum it's not the place to debate the importance of cables, all I can tell is:
in average systems the difference is most likely not audible, but if you have a high-end system, that is revealing, you will be able to identify immediately the differences, no "golden-ears" necessary (only a bit "educated").
So, maybe you don't have the system to see the difference and maybe you have not spend enough $$$ to test a really great USB cable (like DH Labs, Audioquest  Diamond, WW Platinum Starlight).
Those ones cost a lot more than 100$ unfortunately for us...


----------



## sandalaudio

maxh22 said:


> Can you do a short comparison between H2 and Qutest?
> 
> Do you hear any difference between the two of them?



There wasn't such a significant difference, both sounded fairly similar via RCA line out, but I did prefer the Qutest somewhat in that context.
Hugo 2 brought forward the high mid too much, almost like it's competing with what the following amp is doing (Pro iCAN in this case), whereas Qutest partnered nicely with good balanced presentation throughout. I prefer Hugo 2 much better on its own without adding anything behind it. I would have just bought the Hugo 2 if I needed something just for headphones.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

hifipassion said:


> You forgot the "clean power"
> It's true that some companies are selling "not-so-great" entry-level cables at $100 that sound sometimes worse than a $10 stock cable.
> While this forum it's not the place to debate the importance of cables, all I can tell is:
> in average systems the difference is most likely not audible, but if you have a high-end system, that is revealing, you will be able to identify immediately the differences, no "golden-ears" necessary (only a bit "educated").
> ...



So ... I have a pair of Adam A7x with an Adam Sub 7. https://www.adam-audio.com/en/ax-series/a7x/

Does that qualify to be a high end system or not?

I really cant belive that the cables are more important than the actual speakers and room isolation. It doesnt make sense.


----------



## maxh22

sandalaudio said:


> Hugo 2 brought forward the high mid too much, almost like it's competing with what the following amp is doing (Pro iCAN in this case), whereas Qutest partnered nicely with good balanced presentation throughout. I prefer Hugo 2 much better on its own without adding anything behind it. I would have just bought the Hugo 2 if I needed something just for headphones.



So the Qutest is basically slightly more laid back than H2 in the upper mid range?


----------



## hifipassion (Mar 6, 2018)

Please don't get me wrong, the subject of our discussion was "can't hear any difference between a 100$ cable and a 10$ cable."
I have never stated that "cables are more important than the actual speakers and room isolation", please read carefully what is being written.
What I say is that expensive usb cables make sense in high-end systems.
While I have never listened to Adam monitors, someone with a $100000 system will definitely say he owns a high-end one - at least from the price perspective 
Cables do matter in those systems.
In your case, you might want to stick with the general rule: spend 10-15% from the system price on cables.
If you want to find out in what degree cable matters: go listen ! Stop saying "I don't believe", see for yourself and speak from your experience, no offence.


----------



## VintageFlanker

sandalaudio said:


> There wasn't such a significant difference, both sounded fairly similar via RCA line out, but I did prefer the Qutest somewhat in that context.
> Hugo 2 brought forward the high mid too much, almost like it's competing with what the following amp is doing (Pro iCAN in this case), whereas Qutest partnered nicely with good balanced presentation throughout. I prefer Hugo 2 much better on its own without adding anything behind it. I would have just bought the Hugo 2 if I needed something just for headphones.





What voltage do you use with Qutest? it is still hard for me to decide between 2V and 3V


----------



## plsvn

after a few days on 3v I just switched to 2v
volume knob, on my tube pre, still in the very same position and can't hear any meaningful difference in loudness
I'm under the impression overall sound is *maybe* a very tiny little bit "cleaner" but... need more time to be sure
anyway... either 3 or 2v works fine here and differences (if truly any) are abysmal


----------



## VintageFlanker (Mar 6, 2018)

plsvn said:


> after a few days on 3v I just switched to 2v
> volume knob, on my tube pre, still in the very same position and can't hear any meaningful difference in loudness
> I'm under the impression overall sound is *maybe* a very tiny little bit "cleaner" but... need more time to be sure
> anyway... either 3 or 2v works fine here and differences (if truly any) are abysmal



It may depend about amping, certainly.

I do hear a VERY noticeable difference switching between 3V and 2V on my Nova 300 (both speakers and headphones). Sound is more forward and fuller using 3V (appart from the volume level, of course!) and seems to be a bit too thin on 2V.


----------



## VintageFlanker




----------



## adrian.clopotari (Mar 6, 2018)

Problem:

I connect Qutest via USB from laptop.

And whatever file I play, whatever kHz, 128 khz or Flac, the center RED light is always on. It doesnt change to show me the sample frequincy.

Somebody else experienced this?

P.S. the center RED light is ON all the time! no matter if a play a song or not on laptop.


----------



## dmance

adrian.clopotari said:


> Problem:
> 
> I connect Qutest via USB from laptop.
> 
> ...


It is correct. Each file has a sample frequency of 44.1khz.  You are confusing this with the encoding bitrate .


----------



## adrian.clopotari

dmance said:


> It is correct. Each file has a sample frequency of 44.1khz.  You are confusing this with the encoding bitrate .


So when I can see that light other colors?

Cause I assumed that If I play 320 mp3 it will be one colour and if I play FLAC it will be other color.


----------



## VintageFlanker

adrian.clopotari said:


> And whatever file I play, whatever kHz, 128 khz or Flac, the center RED light is always on. It doesnt change to show me the sample frequincy.



No problem at all. FLAC or mp3 are 16bits/44khz. If I may, you are confusing khz and mbps.


----------



## dmance

Adrian,
it may be that all the music you have is 44.1khz @ 16-bits per sample.  The resulting data is then stored lossless (FLAC) or compressed (MP3).  You need to find files that are 24/96, 24/192, 24/88.2, etc.  If you explore the file (details) it will tell you the technical specifics of the file.  Higher resolution files can be purchased online or downloaded from dubious sources just for testing.

You may also have your streaming set so that everything is converted to 16/44.1? 
Dan


----------



## adrian.clopotari

Learned something new today.

Thanks.


----------



## sandalaudio (Mar 6, 2018)

VintageFlanker said:


> What voltage do you use with Qutest? it is still hard for me to decide between 2V and 3V



I used 3V when comparing against Hugo 2, then changed to 2V subsequently since my old iFi DAC was 2V, and stuck with it.
2V felt right for me as the nominal line level expected by most amps these days so I didn't care to try and compare the sound difference. I will have to give it a try.



maxh22 said:


> So the Qutest is basically slightly more laid back than H2 in the upper mid range?



The difference wasn't big so I don't want to make a big deal over it, but basically yes.
I tried on a couple of different amps but I just felt on certain instruments (e.g. violin) that Hugo 2 + amp tend to bring the sound stuck up close and enforcing, whereas Qutest gave the same instrument a little bit more air space to the listener, so it gels nicely with the other instruments.

Maybe it's to do with the benefit of Qutest's USB isolation, or because Qutest output is more suitable for line out because it's tuned for lower voltage gain than Hugo 2?
I still think Hugo 2 sounds amazing on its own as a headphone amp, but after a long comparison demo at the shop, I felt confident about taking away the Qutest for my purpose.


----------



## Skampmeister

Yes, 2v vs 3v, this is a battle I’ve been having. The 2qutes “3v” for my system was perfect. The Qutest is bordering to hot, right on the cusp. The occasional track will push it over the limit. 
The last 12 seconds of Steven Wilson’s “To the Bone” shows off the 3v problems I’m having. The rest of the time you get a sense it’s on the edge. 
This is the biggest mistake they made with the Qutest. They shouldn’t have pushed a higher voltage than the 2qute. If they say they are both exactly 3v, I won’t belive them. I may sell the Qutest because of this issue, and that saddens me greatly. Thankfully I bought the Brooklyn also the day before.


----------



## Rob Watts

2 Qute is 3.0V RMS with 0dB FS and is exactly the same as Qutest when set to 3.0V.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts but why after 3 years of the 2qute am I now hearing overloading issues with Qutest?


----------



## Rob Watts

Perhaps because Qutest is fundamentally smoother, more refined and more transparent it is more apparent?

But it's for sure it is exactly the same OP voltage. The trouble/challenge/excitement with audio is that extremely small technical differences often result in easy to hear and substantial changes. But I can't think of any technical reason why you are experiencing this - Qutest discrete OP stage is identical to 2 Qute, and the voltage is the same at 3V.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts i understand perfectly, the distortion I’ve heard on some tracks totally disappears at 2 volts but is introduced at 3v, never heard this on the 2qute. I actually wish I still had my 2qute so I can reference it now. It’s the exact sound distortion the Brooklyn has, it’s a really hot DAC, but you can taper it down 1db at a time till it disappears. I wish, and I know this is going to far, the the Qutest had a .5v step down instead of 1v. .5v on my system would be perfect. 2v is a tad to thin, 3v is bordering to hot. But I get it, that’s the problem with the myriad of system differences out there. 
I’ll run it on 3v for awhile, try and listen to a variety of more music and see how often the issue may pop up. 
But yes, you are probably correct, maybe this DAC is being more revealing, but that doesn’t explain the loss of distortion lowering the volts.


----------



## x RELIC x

@Skampmeister, do you have any way to actually measure the volume from your amp when you volume match it between 3V and 2V input strength? Humans are terrible at matching by ear and with as little as 0.5dB difference reports are that the louder signal is ‘better’... more dynamic, better separation, more layering... all the things that are usually associated with ‘better’ sound. At the end of the day it’s commonly just a difference in loudness, and humans are wired to prefer louder.

I’m not saying that what you hear isn’t confusing, and I don’t have an answer for why you feel the 2Qute was never too hot, but unless volume matching precisely it’ll be difficult to come to a conclusion between 2V and 3V input to your amp. Especially considering that the 3Vrms OP is identical between the 2Qute and the Qutest.


----------



## Skampmeister

@x RELIC x the setup up I have has been the same for a few years, I know it very well. I can perceive very subtle changes easily. My favorite album is the 192k Neil diamond album “you don’t bring me flowers”, and is my go to reference album. On the 2qute at 75 on the volume, I used to be in awe, still am but the level at 75 with the Qutest make me now uncomfortable as you feel like your being intimidated so to Speak.
Sure, it could be down to other things apart from volume, but yes, it’s interesting.

And no, I have no way to test the out put from my amp.


----------



## x RELIC x

Skampmeister said:


> @x RELIC x the setup up I have has been the same for a few years, I know it very well. I can perceive very subtle changes easily. My favorite album is the 192k Neil diamond album “you don’t bring me flowers”, and is my go to reference album. On the 2qute at 75 on the volume, I used to be in awe, still am but the level at 75 with the Qutest make me now uncomfortable as you feel like your being intimidated so to Speak.
> Sure, it could be down to other things apart from volume, but yes, it’s interesting.
> 
> And no, I have no way to test the out put from my amp.



It is interesting and I am just thinking out loud here. It also may just be down to the different audio presentations between the 2Qute and the Qutest, 2Vrms vs 3Vrms output aside.


----------



## plsvn

x RELIC x said:


> humans are wired to prefer louder



so... I'm not human?


----------



## x RELIC x

plsvn said:


> so... I'm not human?



LOL! 

I also enjoy listening at low to moderate volume (75-80dB on average) but as I mentioned previously a very small change in loudness, that may not be perceived as actually sounding louder, is often considered more dynamic. A 3dB change in volume is where _most average_ people can _readily_ notice a change in loudness. A 1dB change in loudness is what is considered the _threshold_ for the perception for a change in loudness, on average. Typically people do notice as little as 0.5dB difference but it’s usually described as more dynamic rather than louder.

Just some condensed info on potential reasons why differences may be heard, tuning and performance differences aside, when empirically they shouldn’t be. Like I said, I’m just thinking out loud and not asserting that this is a definitive reason. There are many factors involved which makes it difficult to pin point the reason why we hear such differences.


----------



## andromeda1954

Today i received the Sbooster 5v for driving the Qutest I must say ,i like what i hear, it makes a difference in sound quality compared to the stock PSU,more than i expected .With the Sbooster instruments and voices gained in solidity and 3 dimensionality ,soundstage dept improved .Also the bass reproduction is more tight and the Sbooster is not even been burned in yet .So this looks very promising


----------



## dawktah2

Skampmeister said:


> @x RELIC x the setup up I have has been the same for a few years, I know it very well. I can perceive very subtle changes easily. My favorite album is the 192k Neil diamond album “you don’t bring me flowers”, and is my go to reference album. On the 2qute at 75 on the volume, I used to be in awe, still am but the level at 75 with the Qutest make me now uncomfortable as you feel like your being intimidated so to Speak.
> Sure, it could be down to other things apart from volume, but yes, it’s interesting.
> 
> And no, I have no way to test the out put from my amp.



75/100?  What is the SPL in the room?  Just curious...


----------



## Skampmeister (Mar 6, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> It is interesting and I am just thinking out loud here. It also may just be down to the different audio presentations between the 2Qute and the Qutest, 2Vrms vs 3Vrms output aside.



You May be correct, as like Rob said, different presentation, it just for me to decide if I like it. It may also be a synergy thing, my system loved the tone of the 2qute, emphasis on the word tone, where as the Qutest is way more forward, where at the same volume, the Brooklyn is caramel. This is the fine line between detail and musicality. Sure you can design something that rips apart all the details of a song, but at the same time, it has to be enjoyable, and I’m not enjoying the Qutest at all really. I want my 2qute back. This is why vinyl is popular, tone and musicality.


----------



## Skampmeister

dawktah2 said:


> 75/100?  What is the SPL in the room?  Just curious...



75/99 and for that album I mentioned above, spl is average 94.2db and peak is 98.7


----------



## dawktah2

Skampmeister said:


> 75/99 and for that album I mentioned above, spl is average 94.2db and peak is 98.7



Ok, I've recently developed tinnitus and was wondering how much of this can be attributed to clean digital signals? Vinyl/Tape and distortion made things sound like speakers were about to come apart and made you turn it down...


----------



## Skampmeister

Being as I’m not keen at this stage with the tone of the Qutest, I might buy a power brick and run it off batteries, against my usual opinion on this kind of thing.


----------



## maxh22

Skampmeister said:


> Being as I’m not keen at this stage with the tone of the Qutest, I might buy a power brick and run it off batteries, against my usual opinion on this kind of thing.



Another option could include trying the Ifi ipower, but do try batteries as well.


----------



## tony wilson (Mar 6, 2018)

a good 4 -5 days of use you will find changes over time for the better.
i am sure mr watts has isolated the dac from the provided  switching supply as has been stated.
  having  switching wall wart  in the electical system chain  is not ideal  battery power or other is best  i am using a paul hynes sr4 and uptone audio ultra cap because i had them they are 2 of the best on the market  i use them because i have them.
i also have a big anker usb battery that will last for days
why use a wall wart if you have better that is all
make ebay your friend why pay new price for great cables when you can get over 60% cheaper buying used also the cables will be broken in
i have been using vintage chord cable chord prodac i have regular type and the silver version  every week used ones on ebay.
i have been experimenting with really old high end 75ohm broadcast tv video cable,2nd hand ebay  qed referance 75ohm digital cable,audio quest make good stuff as well for the dac cd connection.
again using 2nd hand chord clearway cable  for connecting to amp also black rhodium brand vintage cables  all great quality and a cheaper way too experiment than buying new.
if you do not like  the cable send it back or stick it back on ebay after a few weeks  always buyers
learning how to output the lowest voltage on cutest  by reading the online manual is important
  having an evening with different filters is also an idea rather than pressing buttons every 5 secs green setting is my favorite.
as someone said in an earlier post the design is top notch discreet very grown up.
i powered down for 4 days powered up tonight and it remembers the voltage output settings i put in 2 weeks ago very cute est.


----------



## BLacklWf (Mar 7, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> You May be correct, as like Rob said, different presentation, it just for me to decide if I like it. It may also be a synergy thing, my system loved the tone of the 2qute, emphasis on the word tone, where as the Qutest is way more forward, where at the same volume, the Brooklyn is caramel. This is the fine line between detail and musicality. Sure you can design something that rips apart all the details of a song, but at the same time, it has to be enjoyable, and I’m not enjoying the Qutest at all really. I want my 2qute back. This is why vinyl is popular, tone and musicality.



Does 2cute or Qutest oversample by default? If so, any chance Qutest oversample to a higher bit rate? I'm asking because I wonder if the distortion you are experiencing maybe clipping.  It's very common for a clipping to occur during oversampling unless a dac is built with some headroom. If Qutest oversample to a higher bit rate, I suppose it maybe more susceptible for a clipping than 2cute.  But, I never had neither, so just I'm just guessing here. If you can turn off oversampling with Qutest, you can test if the distortion still occurs with no oversampling.


----------



## Skampmeister

The Qutest does not do any oversampling.


----------



## dmance

Skampmeister said:


> The Qutest does not do any oversampling.


Hello???  What do you think WTA is??


----------



## Skampmeister

dmance said:


> Hello???  What do you think WTA is??



So I’m wrong, and I don’t know what an WTA is, no need to loose your schiit. He mentioned a on off switch for the over sampling, so I ASSUMED it was an option other DAC’s have, relax mate.


----------



## BLacklWf

Skampmeister said:


> So I’m wrong, and I don’t know what an WTA is, no need to loose your schiit. He mentioned a on off switch for the over sampling, so I ASSUMED it was an option other DAC’s have, relax mate.


I just skimmed through Qutest manual and looks like Qutest will always oversample unless it's fed with the max bitrate files. Do you have Roon or any player where you can change the headroom? If so, you can play with a headroom to see if the distortion you hear is a clipping. Otherwise, have you tried different digital filters Qutest offers?


----------



## jayz

adrian.clopotari said:


> So ... I have a pair of Adam A7x with an Adam Sub 7. https://www.adam-audio.com/en/ax-series/a7x/
> 
> Does that qualify to be a high end system or not?
> 
> I really cant belive that the cables are more important than the actual speakers and room isolation. It doesnt make sense.




A fan of active speakers myself ... how is the sub integration A7X + sub 7 ? I suppose a 7-inch woofer must be snappy but I've never heard a ported sub capable of keeping up with an active speaker.

Regarding cables, there is definitely an affect including power cables but in my experience, there are definitely high value, low-cost upgrades out there. Digital cables specifically, I never understood why it would make a difference but some here have suggested that RFI gets in through cables (which makes sense) and therefore, what I have done is to get a well specified coax SPDIF cable and add two ferrites at both ends. On the other hand, Analog cables are a can of worms in my book. I have a few of my mates trying endlessly to even-out the characteristics of their system using different cables and that is something I wanted to avoid at all costs so my Qutest is plugged directly into my actives with rca adapters. So in short yes, cables do make a difference but unless you are Michael Fremer, best to stick to high value low cost solutions.

BTW it has been nearly a month with my Qutest and I really like what it has brought to my system. Listening to Katie Melua's In Winter album, it is amazing to hear so much space in the performance, the choir is right in front of you and around you. At the end of the listening session it dawns on you that actually, music is created to be a sum of many parts and when it is reproduced, it needs to be heard in that way to realise the simplicity of the arrangement and it is that simplicity that makes the album so enjoyable.


----------



## adrian.clopotari

Yes. I too connect the Qutest directly to Speakers (in fact the signal gets first to Sub 7 via COAX and then form Sub 7 to A7x vis COAX. Some sugested that I should use a pre-amp, but I really dont see the purpose. It works just fine.

First I got a Sub 10, based on the reviews on the internet and Adam site recommendations. OMG! I literally experienced pain in my chest on 10% volume. Now I use Sub 7 at max 40% volume. Its very clear and its a big improvement to the sound of the A7x. I cant imagine having a bigger Sub. Adam produts are really powerful.

And I use inexpensive COAX cables.


----------



## Skampmeister

I take back anything I’ve said about the Qutest in my moment of despair. One thing I’ve learnt about this hobby over the years is things have to settle, including myself. 
Me and the little fella just had a moment, and jebus, wowsers.


----------



## Chiswickian

Skampmeister. Just out of interest, why did you purchase the Qutest and the Brooklyn DACs at virtually the same time. Also, with the Brooklyn costing easily twice as much as the Qutest, is it a fair comparison?


----------



## Skampmeister

Chiswickian said:


> Skampmeister. Just out of interest, why did you purchase the Qutest and the Brooklyn DACs at virtually the same time. Also, with the Brooklyn costing easily twice as much as the Qutest, is it a fair comparison?



Good question. Been a Chord fan for 3 years, loved my 2qute, couldn’t wait for the Qutest. But since it’s release, I’ve always been intrigued by the Brooklyn. For one, it’s a very pretty device and I wanted a good’ish headphone amp. Besides it being reviewed well, I was just curious about it and wanted one to try. ‘But then the Brooklyn Plus arrived and then the Qutest as well, I actually couldn’t make up my mind which one to get, because I’d always be wondering what if, so I bought both.
Being as they are both just a week old, and as you can tell with this thread, I’ve been up and down with the Qutest, and actually I think I’m a bit under the weather, so my hearing is being rather sensitive, and things in general are sounding harsh, until tonight that is, seems to be back to normal. 
Both DAC’s have their strong points, in this early stage I’m massively enjoying the Qutest with more mellow and quiet recordings, and boy does it do these well, and the Brooklyn so far seems to be more fun at higher volumes, especially for rock/metal. 
In Australia  there’s only $600 between them, $2400-$2999 and the Brooklyn has a lot more features than the Chord. But as far as purity with their DAC’s, I think the Chord will come through. 
They are both way different than the 2qute, and the adjustment period is being up and down, as it seems my health is also lol. 
Will I keep both, most likely, I like the Brooklyn with my LCD-X’S and the Chord will most likely be used the most with the room system. Plus MQA on the Brooklyn is better than MQA just through a Bluesound Node2, which each DAC has its own.


----------



## Chiswickian

Wow, thanks for the very comprehensive reply. Actually you’re right, the Brooklyn+ isn’t 2 x the price of the Chord. I was forgetting I got my Qutest cheaper than RRP via trading in my old Arcam DAC.
To be honest, I’d never looked at the Mytek DACs before, but the Brooklyn+ does get some very positive write ups and even has me curious now.
I’m also just getting over a cold and suffered the same overly sensitive hearing too, but that appears to be settling now and I’m enjoying the Qutest even more.
Next on my to do list now is looking into a good external power supply for the Qutest and a network audio player of some type. My poor wallet!


----------



## PanusKatus




----------



## plsvn (Mar 7, 2018)

that JCat 200w LPS... is just a ("slightly") overpriced HD-Plex 200w


----------



## dawktah2

OK, do you still need power conditioning if you use a LPS?


----------



## Light - Man

dawktah2 said:


> OK, do you still need power conditioning if you use a LPS?



Yes, is the short answer and is probably more important and will help the rest of your system including your amp.


----------



## Skampmeister

PanusKatus said:


>




I struggle watching this guys stuff. He annoys me.


----------



## Skampmeister

Is this the iFI power supply people are talking about?

https://addictedtoaudio.com.au/products/ifi-ipower-low-noise-power-supply


----------



## Chiswickian

I think the IFI audio power supply a lot of people refer to is... https://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-iusb3-0/

Is there a separate thread anywhere that talks about external power supplies for DACs as I'd love to hear other people's perspectives, but don't want to hijack this thread to this end.


----------



## maxh22

Skampmeister said:


> Is this the iFI power supply people are talking about?
> 
> https://addictedtoaudio.com.au/products/ifi-ipower-low-noise-power-supply



This is the one but on this site it is overpriced, the ipower retails for $49. You would need to get the 5v version.


----------



## Skampmeister

maxh22 said:


> This is the one but on this site it is overpriced, the ipower retails for $49. You would need to get the 5v version.


It’s in Australian dollars.


----------



## Skampmeister

Ahh good, they sell the other ifi one at the same store https://addictedtoaudio.com.au/products/ifi-micro-iusb3-0-total-usb-solution

So is this particular power supply as good as some of the others people mention here, will this be all I have to look at?


----------



## dawktah2

So any update on why US hasn't gotten any Qutest?


----------



## dmance (Mar 7, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> So any update on why US hasn't gotten any Qutest?


I hear Canada got a shipment this week. I blame Trump's new tariff policies...


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 8, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> Will I keep both, most likely, I like the Brooklyn with my LCD-X’S and the Chord will most likely be used the most with the room system.



Living the dream mate! Two great toys to play with. But you could have had the best of both worlds with the Hugo2 !  Just kidding. The Brooklyn+ is designed by a clever fella too.



Skampmeister said:


> Is this the iFI power supply people are talking about?
> 
> https://addictedtoaudio.com.au/products/ifi-ipower-low-noise-power-supply



I would stay away from this one.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...cable/?page=3&amp;tab=comments#comment-713516

and I don't usually like to quote this site but he found similar with the iFi iPower:

https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...nts-of-topping-d50-dac.2403/page-2#post-68196

What are leakage currents and why can they SOMETIMES be bad (depending on overall system)?  

Some helpful posts to start with:

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...nding/?page=2&amp;tab=comments#comment-723187

and

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...nding/?page=9&amp;tab=comments#comment-735311

and

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...ing/?page=172&amp;tab=comments#comment-730361

In Oz, I would contact Clay Gieseler for his great priced linear PSU. You won't regret it.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Em2016 I know of Clay very well, I’m a member over at stereonet, I’ll look into it, cheers.


----------



## flyte3333

Skampmeister said:


> @Em2016 I know of Clay very well, I’m a member over at stereonet, I’ll look into it, cheers.



Ask him for a good deal for both a 5Vdc one AND a 12Vdc one for your Brooklyn+ too.... his 4Amp model....

Ask him if you can try it out anyway and return if you didn't like. Can't imagine you'll return them though...


----------



## Skampmeister

@Em2016 how would one use his PSU to hook up to a Micro USB device? It doesn’t have a usb out.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 8, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> @Em2016 how would one use his PSU to hook up to a Micro USB device? It doesn’t have a usb out.



Just tell him and I'm pretty sure he can fit a microUSB connector to the output of his linear PSU.

Otherwise get one of these:

https://core-electronics.com.au/microusb-plug-to-5-5-2-1mm-dc-barrel-jack-adapter.html

But if you prefer this short cable adapter make sure you do tell Clay you're using this, so he knows what to make the end of his cable.


----------



## Skampmeister (Mar 8, 2018)

@Em2016 cheers mate, I asked him over at stereonet 

@Rob Watts just a quick question, the Qutest will be perfectly happy on a 1.5amp psu? Only asking because the stock psu is 2.1amp


----------



## plsvn

not Rob Watts  but... I'm powering mine from an UpTone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2 rated for 1.1A max


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 8, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> @Rob Watts just a quick question, the Qutest will be perfectly happy on a 1.5v psu?



I can answer this one - no!

5Vdc! I'm guessing you meant 1.5Amp? 

No problemo. See below from the Guru (Rob) himself:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...c-official-thread.869417/page-2#post-13964721


----------



## Skampmeister

@Em2016 lol, I edited my post.


----------



## hifipassion

Hello everyone,
So, from your tests... what is the best micro usb cable to power the Qutest ?


----------



## stevedlu

plsvn said:


> not Rob Watts  but... I'm powering mine from an UpTone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2 rated for 1.1A max


What is your impressions with the UltraCap?


----------



## dmance

Im also interested in the UltraCap ...but at 1.1amp its far short of the 2amps of the factory PSU.  We need Chord's blessing on this to avoid warranty.


----------



## plsvn (Mar 8, 2018)

stevedlu said:


> What is your impressions with the UltraCap?



I was already powering the 2Qute from an UpTone Audio JS-2 I'm using for the Mac mini and, back then, found it made a sensible difference compared to its stock SMPS (but YMMV, as usual )
Not even tried Qutest's stock PS (plus I don't have any SMPS in my whole system)


----------



## plsvn (Mar 8, 2018)

dmance said:


> We need Chord's blessing on this to avoid warranty.



aaaaaannnnndddd... here it is: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...c-official-thread.869417/page-2#post-13964721 
(already quoted a few posts above  )

plus I can find no mention about voiding warranty by using a PS other than the stock one anywhere on any Qutest's page/manual/datasheet


----------



## tony wilson (Mar 8, 2018)

on the subject of power source early on i spoke to the friendly folks at uptone audio they where cool and calm about using the ultracap with cutest which i have been doing for weeks now rob has stated here that 1a is ok.
whatever the the ultracap gives it is enough.  i also contacted paul hynes on the subject he made me  up a superb custom silver microusb cable  for his suberb bit of kit the sr4 over specced over built solid and will last a life time.
again paul hynes was super relaxed about everthing working  with the cutest and it does very well. in terms of the  chord angle...all the companies mentioned are working with a standardised defined voltage...

chord cannot apply do and don't rules and regulations based on a usb standard  power.
i am sure they will be relaxed about it.
i would think without the internal battery issues less units will be going back to the factory using the cutest system.


----------



## Skampmeister

Thanks @Em2016 spoken to clay and the PSU will be here next week  hopefully.


----------



## flyte3333

Skampmeister said:


> Thanks @Em2016 spoken to clay and the PSU will be here next week  hopefully.



Jeeze, no mucking around. I like it


----------



## Skampmeister

@Em2016 can I ask you why you think his PSU will be as good as anything else? I know his reputation, but I’m curious on your opinion.


----------



## flyte3333

Skampmeister said:


> @Em2016 can I ask you why you think his PSU will be as good as anything else? I know his reputation, but I’m curious on your opinion.



I never said it would be as good or better than anything else. It will surely be better than the iPower you looked close to buying and it's probably the cheapest of all safe linear PSU's you can get - so I'm excluding all the Chinese eBay ones here. 

To be clear and fair, some of the Chinese eBay ones are perfectly fine and work really well, but some not. It can be hit and miss.

There's none of that risk with Clay's... It comes with an Aussie safety certified transformer (C Tick) too... Good warranty too. He recently posted on SNA that he's had no field returns with his linear PSU's so far...

It's built by someone that knows how to build quality PSU's and it's cheaper than all the good and safe ones from overseas.

Safe, well designed and built and with local warranty and support and well priced (in comparison...) - ticks most of the boxes for me.


----------



## flyte3333

Also @Skampmeister 

For background, I have a couple Uptone LPS-1's, a TeddyPardo and a Giesler linear PSU. All powering different things.

Don't ask me to rank them in terms of best performing - they are all fantastic - ALL. 

But the Gieseler is the cheapest, Aussie built and C-tick safety approved, so overall probably the best value per $ , in my opinion, so it was an easy recommendation over the iFi iPower. 

Also, check out all the links I posted earlier.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Em2016 good answer, cheers for that. My assumption was based on the recommendation


----------



## flyte3333

Skampmeister said:


> @Em2016 good answer, cheers for that. My assumption was based on the recommendation



I added another reply just above yours too, for further background.


----------



## Skampmeister

Does anyone know if the performance of a product has ANYdegradation to performance using the lowest possible recommended amperage. 2.1amp to 1.5amp, is it crucial?


----------



## plsvn (Mar 8, 2018)

doesn't matter what the stock PS is rated at: what matters is just how much the device will draw from it and Rob said 1A is enough


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts hey mate, Clay Gieseler, the guy who is building me a PSU for the Qutest just wants to double check one thing, and his question is this:

“Will the Qutest run from a standard micro USB PSU & is the polarity the same?”

It’s probably obvious, but just making sure so there’s zero doubt. 

Cheers mate.


----------



## plsvn

again not Rob but, if you trust me, same polarity of a default USB micro plug
(assuming the above I asked Ghent Audio to build, for the UltraCap LPS-1.2, a custom 5.5x2.1 DC barrel plug to USB micro cable and it works fine)


----------



## mikebunting

I have had a Qutest for a couple of weeks and I am loving the exrtra dimension it adds to the sound that I hear. I use it primarily connected to a NUC i7 which runs Roon. Most of my Roon listening is via Tidal but some is from my stored files on my synology. What I can’t decide is should I get Roon to upsample the Tidal diet or is it better to feed the Qutest with the original stream?


----------



## jcn3

mikebunting said:


> I have had a Qutest for a couple of weeks and I am loving the exrtra dimension it adds to the sound that I hear. I use it primarily connected to a NUC i7 which runs Roon. Most of my Roon listening is via Tidal but some is from my stored files on my synology. What I can’t decide is should I get Roon to upsample the Tidal diet or is it better to feed the Qutest with the original stream?



rob would say to let the qutest do it -- that it would be the best way to maximize the sound.

i would use your ears -- it's certainly easy enough to turn on/off that capability within roon.


----------



## mikebunting

My untrained ears would suggest that letting the Qutest do the work is best but I just wanted to make sure that I was not missing something!


----------



## dawktah2

mikebunting said:


> I have had a Qutest for a couple of weeks and I am loving the exrtra dimension it adds to the sound that I hear. I use it primarily connected to a NUC i7 which runs Roon. Most of my Roon listening is via Tidal but some is from my stored files on my synology. What I can’t decide is should I get Roon to upsample the Tidal diet or is it better to feed the Qutest with the original stream?



Are you using DS Audio to play files from Synology? I have a DS416play


----------



## mikebunting

No the synology just serves the files to Roon but it is also a DS416play.


----------



## Chiswickian

Has anyone any experience of Paul Hynes power supplies?  I've heard they're good but would like to know if anyone on here has experience of them?


----------



## tony wilson

Chiswickian said:


> Has anyone any experience of Paul Hynes power supplies?  I've heard they're good but would like to know if anyone on here has experience of them?








paul hynes has sold many over the years they rarely come up on ebay...folks keep them.

on one of the threads you here bad stories about delays paul lives on a scottish island  and all his stuff is hand made not factory.
i purchased mainly as a resposne to all the snow flakes moaning about waiting times.
i paid him  3 weeks later to my shock the item turned up shock because i had heard stories i purchased the sr4.
he is slow to reply via email as i did not hassle him and i was polite i always got a reply.
the guy is fantastic very helpful amazing amount of knowledge all i care about is having a supply that will not cut out or  give the wrong or variable voltage as you get with the cheap china things.

his stuff is very expensive i have a lot of experience using japan tv camera broadcast power supplies of the 80s and 90s  paul hynes power supplies are that kind of quality.
nothing better on the hi fi market i have the uptone audio ultracap the only issue i have with that is it uses a switching supply to charge the caps. 
these are both very flexible supplies and will be able to be used in many aplications over the years.

the hynes thing is built like a tank it also give the lowest noise purist voltage so you get a super quite noise floor.

it is also an investment if i sell this thing i will not be losing much  money.

i have 2 faulty ebay china supples that are now worth  5 pounds spares or repair.

if anyone is making anything that comes close to pauls power supplies i would like the info myself.


----------



## Chiswickian

Thanks Tony.  Yes, I've exchanged emails with Paul and he does seem very friendly.  Paul also offers to supply power cables, a copper one at £55 and a fine silver one at £90.  Does anyone know whether the silver power cable is worth the upgrade audibly?   I've no real experience playing with silver power cables, but hopefully somewhere here can help advise?


----------



## tony wilson

the lead he gives is pretty cool thin curly thing i got the cheaper copper one plenty good he supplied an adapter for micro usb as well.

with cutest i would imagine the bnc cable 75ohm will be more critical   experimenting with those and  rca leads better idea good quality 2nd hand stuff off ebay.


----------



## Chiswickian

Tony.  When I spoke, well emailed, with Paul, he did mention that he recently provided an SR4 to someone else with a Qutest. I'm guessing he was referring to you.  How does it compare to your ultracap on the Qutest?  Are you keeping the SR4 on your Qutest?


----------



## tony wilson

the sr4 in terms of build quality  cannot be beat as i said it has more in common with the way japan did power supply before they started outsourcing everything to china.
i had been after one of his supplies since 2012 but assumed it would take a long time so it never happened  so pretty pleased with the speed of the order. the sr4 is a keeper  as i said i spent ages trying to find a used one a couple of folks i know where not even using them but would not sell them on.which is a good sign.

i have been playing around with battery power nothing sounds as good as when the hynes thing is connected to the cutest  the whole system is crazy quiet as stated even with the revised circuit in the cutest immune from switching power supply i do not want it on the mains near my gear.

the uptone ultracap  adds energy and a zest to the music but i prefer hynes stability brick next to the chord brick


----------



## kn0ppers (Mar 9, 2018)

What would be a worthy headamp to pair with the Qutest in the 500-750$/€ price range? I am really torn between getting a Hugo2 or a Qutest. I love that I could take the Hugo anywhere and it has a definitely-good-enough-for-me headamp, but it also has batteries that will have to be replaced sometime in the future (and since I don't really know when/if Britain is leaving the EU, the whole cross-border-warranty thing or replacement services could get complicated and more expensive than necessary). Although I have a Chord dealer nearby, the UK prices are much better because of the current exchange rates. The Qutest on the other hand could go for years without any service at all. Strictly talking about sound, is there any notable differences people found between Hugo2 and Qutest that more than one or two people noticed? I have only listened to a Mojo and Hugo2 so far but don't have time to read 50 pages...I mean there shouldn't be as it is basically the same with minor changes in the power delivery minus the headamp and bluetooth.




Spoiler: Advanced question!



A question regardless of what I said above, rather concerning the DACs in general: Would it "mash up" the sound if used a simple circuit with BB DRV134 differential amplifiers to balance the signal directly after the Dac with really short interconnects before sending the audio signal through longer XLR cables? I looked at the  DRV134 datasheet and it doesn't look too bad, I mean it's basically used in recording studio equipment all over the world, but it's not perfect. I feel like in my environment I would get more distortion when using unbalanced cables compared to using this circuit. My interconnects are not extremely long (≤ 2m) but both my desk and the living room setup are badly affected by EMI from all kinds of devices, I had various kinds of problems in the past and I am trying to get it sorted out, but it is still a huge issue for me...and no, sadly I can't just go for a Hugo TT instead...


----------



## dawktah2

mikebunting said:


> No the synology just serves the files to Roon but it is also a DS416play.



I'm still waiting for my Qutest but I noticed music sounds different directly from Synology using DS Audio app using USB speaker into my WA8. What do you think?


----------



## Currawong

kn0ppers said:


> What would be a worthy headamp to pair with the Qutest in the 500-750$/€ price range? I am really torn between getting a Hugo2 or a Qutest. I love that I could take the Hugo anywhere and it has a definitely-good-enough-for-me headamp, but it also has batteries that will have to be replaced sometime in the future (and since I don't really know when/if Britain is leaving the EU, the whole cross-border-warranty thing or replacement services could get complicated and more expensive than necessary). Although I have a Chord dealer nearby, the UK prices are much better because of the current exchange rates. The Qutest on the other hand could go for years without any service at all. Strictly talking about sound, is there any notable differences people found between Hugo2 and Qutest that more than one or two people noticed? I have only listened to a Mojo and Hugo2 so far but don't have time to read 50 pages...I mean there shouldn't be as it is basically the same with minor changes in the power delivery minus the headamp and bluetooth.



I'd get the Hugo 2 and not worry about the battery. By the time it matters, either A: Chord will have come out with a better model, or models, and you'll want that instead, or B: The battery tech will have improved so much that whatever replacement option is available will be worth paying for even if you don't upgrade to something new.


----------



## kn0ppers

Currawong said:


> I'd get the Hugo 2 and not worry about the battery. By the time it matters, either A: Chord will have come out with a better model, or models, and you'll want that instead, or B: The battery tech will have improved so much that whatever replacement option is available will be worth paying for even if you don't upgrade to something new.



Once it's out of warranty and I could get hold of some suitable batteries I would replace them myself if I don't like the service fee.


----------



## ajreynol

2Qute owner checking in. Just found out this product exists and am interested. 

I assume there's no upgrade program available for 2Qute owners that simply want to upgrade?


----------



## miketlse

ajreynol said:


> 2Qute owner checking in. Just found out this product exists and am interested.
> 
> I assume there's no upgrade program available for 2Qute owners that simply want to upgrade?


Not aware of one, but maybe some dealers will accept your 2Qute in part-exchange for a Qutest.


----------



## AlexB73

tony wilson said:


> the sr4 in terms of build quality  cannot be beat as i said it has more in common with the way japan did power supply before they started outsourcing everything to china.
> i had been after one of his supplies since 2012 but assumed it would take a long time so it never happened  so pretty pleased with the speed of the order. the sr4 is a keeper  as i said i spent ages trying to find a used one a couple of folks i know where not even using them but would not sell them on.which is a good sign.
> 
> i have been playing around with battery power nothing sounds as good as when the hynes thing is connected to the cutest  the whole system is crazy quiet as stated even with the revised circuit in the cutest immune from switching power supply i do not want it on the mains near my gear.
> ...


Does Hynes Power Supplies have enough dynamic and live? 
What about general musicality compared to Uptone ultracap?


----------



## ajreynol

miketlse said:


> Not aware of one, but maybe some dealers will accept your 2Qute in part-exchange for a Qutest.


sounds good. I'll send out some emails.


----------



## tony wilson (Mar 10, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> Does Hynes Power Supplies have enough dynamic and live?
> What about general musicality compared to Uptone ultracap?





i think the hynes is simply providing purity quality stability.
i turn my stuff off a lot i know someone who has had his hynes thing on since 2011.
that is not my bag  i just wanted a product that i could use for many applications  as i said i also ordered as a reaction to all the moaning forum snow flakes that where getting hysterical about paul not emailing them very often.

a lot of this stuff is about psychologies because of poor quality of a lot of new generation equipment i simply wanted stability and quality.

something special is happening with the ultracap but again psycho stuff kicks in is the included switching power supply doing bad stuff are the ultracap noise harming the music  signal while charging..

i have an idea should i buy another dodgy linear power supply from china to charge power my ultracap.
should i use my paul hynes to power my ultracap should i use a battery to power my ulracap which then powers the cutest.

before long the doctor is taking you away fro treatment because you have a room full of power supplies car batteries and china usb battery.

walwarts are small cheap made by the billion in china alas in some cases based on terrible work conditions.
something has to give with them.

uptone audio designers are very clever so is hynes designs  expensive but both provide stability and quality.

uptone provides a more youthful zest vigour and speed to the mix  hynes is an aston martin it has nothing to proove  it just is and does it's thing and says everything is good everything sorted relax leave the cutest  energising  to me : )

i have to go now the music is playing the doctor just came  over the pa system and said it is medication time 
medication time : )


----------



## PanusKatus

miketlse said:


> Not aware of one, but maybe some dealers will accept your 2Qute in part-exchange for a Qutest.



I was fortunate to have a dealer who did a very fair part-x and I wouldn’t have got as much on eBay.


----------



## dawktah2 (Mar 10, 2018)

@RobWatts,

Ok, I understand how a high quality power supply affects an amplifier. I understand how a clean power supply affects noise. Mr. Watts can you explain how power supply affects a DAC? Then Mr. Watts explain how it could affect the Qutest.

I'm 52 and not that technical, as a surgeon I just look at things differently. You can PM me if you feel will derail thread.


----------



## GSP_

Hasn’t the PSU conversation been done to death in every single Chord product thread already? Perhaps we need the mods to create a PSU enabler/justification/q&a thread.


----------



## Skampmeister (Mar 10, 2018)

edit, miss read post. 

Anyway, the Qutest is humming along.


----------



## flacre

GSP_ said:


> Hasn’t the PSU conversation been done to death in every single Chord product thread already? Perhaps we need the mods to create a PSU enabler/justification/q&a thread.


+1000


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> @RobWatts,
> 
> Ok, I understand how a high quality power supply affects an amplifier. I understand how a clean power supply affects noise. Mr. Watts can you explain how power supply affects a DAC? Then Mr. Watts explain how it could affect the Qutest.
> 
> I'm 52 and not that technical, as a surgeon I just look at things differently. You can PM me if you feel will derail thread.


There are some posts by RW if you search the chord threads - is this the sort of info that you are seeking?


----------



## Chiswickian

Irrespective of the last few comments, I still welcome members' views on the positive/negative impact of different PSU on their Qutest and any expert opinions (Rob) on the matter.  I'm keen to maximise the performance of my DAC and if pairing it with the right PSU is the best way to do this, then I'd like to know.


----------



## Skampmeister

I’ll be getting a Gieseler PSU on tues or Wednesday, so I’ll let everybody know how that goes.


----------



## Chiswickian

Thanks Skampmeister.  I'm about to order a Paul Hynes PSU, after some discussion with him.  I'll report back on this also.


----------



## dawktah2 (Mar 10, 2018)

GSP_ said:


> Hasn’t the PSU conversation been done to death in every single Chord product thread already? Perhaps we need the mods to create a PSU enabler/justification/q&a thread.



I asked my question in an attempt to _*understand*_ how people hear what they do and so I am not "chasing the dragon..."

That is part of the reason I requested a PM reply from Rob if necessary.  I myself would like to hear more about the sound the way *its shipped.* 

Last few posts have been about the PSU more than the Qutest itself...


----------



## ajreynol

PanusKatus said:


> I was fortunate to have a dealer who did a very fair part-x and I wouldn’t have got as much on eBay.


I wish I could find a dealer like that. I made 3 calls and they were all talking about like 25% of the value of the item.


----------



## dawktah2

Chiswickian said:


> Irrespective of the last few comments, I still welcome members' views on the positive/negative impact of different PSU on their Qutest and any expert opinions (Rob) on the matter.  I'm keen to maximise the performance of my DAC and if pairing it with the right PSU is the best way to do this, then I'd like to know.



Is this like buying a Centenario and someone saying you need to change the exhaust?


----------



## Rob Watts

dawktah2 said:


> @RobWatts,
> 
> Ok, I understand how a high quality power supply affects an amplifier. I understand how a clean power supply affects noise. Mr. Watts can you explain how power supply affects a DAC? Then Mr. Watts explain how it could affect the Qutest.
> 
> I'm 52 and not that technical, as a surgeon I just look at things differently. You can PM me if you feel will derail thread.





Chiswickian said:


> Irrespective of the last few comments, I still welcome members' views on the positive/negative impact of different PSU on their Qutest and any expert opinions (Rob) on the matter.  I'm keen to maximise the performance of my DAC and if pairing it with the right PSU is the best way to do this, then I'd like to know.



The accepted wisdom is that linear PSU's are the best, and that switchers are the worst, and I too bought into that prejudice some 5 years ago. But with the Hugo 1 project, my first portable DAC, you absolutely have to use switcher regulators from an efficiency POV.

And here is what is strange - the switchers sounded much better than the linear regulators - and - the DAC measured better too. Now the measurements were easy to understand, and its down to FPGA core noise being much lower with switchers than with linear, due to efficiency issues. But the improved sound quality? That was actually down to lower RF noise.

RF noise is a massive problem in audio, and like a fungal foot infection in the wet, is pernicious and almost impossible to remove; the effects from 100 kHz to many GHz are very audible. The technical reason for the sensitivity is down to noise floor modulation - and this is an effect that one can simulate and easily measure. Indeed, my DAC's are the only DAC's at all (any price) that show zero measured noise floor modulation. The strange thing about noise floor modulation is that it does not matter how small it is, careful listening tests exposes it as very audible. In large amounts it shows up as grain, glare and hardness; in small amounts it adds brightness and suppresses timbre variation - in that warm instruments sound unnaturally bright too.

So why would switchers sound warmer and richer than linear regulators? A switcher must employ an RF filter - and today RF filters are very effective (with SMD chip components) at removing both the switching components and the incoming RF noise from the mains and other circuits. So when you buy a switcher PSU you are getting an effective RF noise filter too; but a linear supply is completely open to RF from the mains. And today, RF in the house is a massive issue with a huge number of RF sources from kHz to 5 GHz.

So do not make the assumption that a high end audiophile linear supply is better than a humble switcher; it's probably much worse, with considerably more RF noise. Also, RF is a problem in that some actually like the SQ from RF noise; it adds an edge to the sound, which superficially it's easy to enjoy - particularly when doing AB tests - but when it comes to actually enjoying music you will find the richer and warmer sound of low RF more musical, enjoyable and with less listener fatigue.

Having said all that, it is a complex area - and it's technically possible that a switcher may interfere with a RF sensitive power amp or headphone amp. My view is for one to try a USB battery bank - and if you can hear no change (in my system I can't) then forget about upgrading the PSU - as any change in SQ is due to more RF noise from the linear supply actually making it sound brighter and worse. A USB battery source will give the lowest possible noise and the best SQ.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 11, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> So when you buy a switcher PSU you are getting an effective RF noise filter too; but a linear supply is completely open to RF from the mains.



Hi Rob, does this mean the transformer isolation of linear PSU's are generally ineffective from filtering RF from mains?

For those following his CA Forum posts, John S has measured SMPS's and linear PSU's and found (of those he's measured, i.e. not every PSU on the planet) SMPS's generally have higher leakage currents than linear PSU's. SMPS's generally have what he calls 'high' and 'low impedance leakage' currents. And he's found linear PSU's generally only have lower leakage, which are easier to filter inside DACs - digital isolators and even ethernet transformers apparently do a great job at filtering these low impedance leakage currents. He says he's made up his own testing gear to measure this stuff.

In addition, I thought leakage currents also play an important role in RF interference?

I know your DACs themselves do a great job internally filtering RF, right at the USB power input (ferrite isolation) and after the input.

As you said it's complicated stuff and probably difficult to over simplify and there are multiple things at play.

While I don't lose sleep over it I do find learning about this stuff very interesting!

And I fully agree your DACs are some of the least sensitive to power supplies of DACs I've had in my system but in my case, mostly for headphone use for me.

Appreciated


----------



## Rob Watts

All PSU's are transformer coupled, and innately provide negligible RF isolation, as the interwinding capacitance on the transformer is too large. To get rid of RF you must have effective RF filtering, and that means a complex multistage filter. But even simple SMPS filters are better than no filters that are often in linear PSU's.

And yes leakage currents at the switching frequency is an issue - but the switching frequency is actually very low, of 50 to 100 kHz typically. This noise a DAC PSU is quite able to deal with - even simple DAC's - but its 1MHz to several GHz that is the larger SQ problem, and that's the area when you need extensive RF filtering.

Another point - my lowest noise source that is mains driven is my lab switched mode PSU - and this has much lower measured noise than a linear PSU and negligible leakage currents.


----------



## Romi54

I connected an Ifi iPower to the Qutest and it sounded less hard, a bit warmer and less stressful.

Unfortunately, the Ifi broke after an hour ....


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 11, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> All PSU's are transformer coupled, and innately provide negligible RF isolation, as the interwinding capacitance on the transformer is too large. To get rid of RF you must have effective RF filtering, and that means a complex multistage filter. But even simple SMPS filters are better than no filters that are often in linear PSU's.
> 
> And yes leakage currents at the switching frequency is an issue - but the switching frequency is actually very low, of 50 to 100 kHz typically. This noise a DAC PSU is quite able to deal with - even simple DAC's - but its 1MHz to several GHz that is the larger SQ problem, and that's the area when you need extensive RF filtering.
> 
> Another point - my lowest noise source that is mains driven is my lab switched mode PSU - and this has much lower measured noise than a linear PSU and negligible leakage currents.



Thanks Rob.

As a backdrop to all this, I've been told by another expert that EU regulations will soon/eventually make linear PSU's non-viable, and this will force a global change.

So with this forced change, I guess it's reasonable to expect lots of fast improvement and innovation going forward in switching PSU's (and amps...).

It sounds like you're already ahead of most in that area.


----------



## Triode User

Em2016 said:


> As a backdrop to all this, I've been told by another expert that EU regulations will soon/eventually make linear PSU's non-viable, and this will force a global change.



Interested, were you told of the logic behind this?


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 11, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Interested, were you told of the logic behind this?



Nope, I wasn't told the background to mentioned EU regulations.

I was just discussing SMPS's vs linear PSU's with them and they said it didn't matter what advantages linear PSU's had because longer term, these regulations (I assume related to power consumption) will force everything to switching PSU's (and amps) and we'll see even faster innovation in these areas.

I'm just reporting what I was told by someone who I respect to be in the know. I'm not claiming this as fact, so I'd be just as interested as you in this background info.

Is there any truth/accuracy to this EU regulations stuff @Rob Watts  ? Or has someone been telling me porkies


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 11, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Interested, were you told of the logic behind this?



A quick Google lead me to this. I don't know if it's related as it relates to external PSU's but maybe it is related. Hopefully Rob can share if any of the above I mentioned has any accuracy to it.

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topi...gy-efficient-products/external-power-supplies

To re-iterate, I wasn't told that linear PSU's would be outright banned. I was told that the regulations would instead make linear PSU's non-viable, long term... And the main point of our discussion was that this would drive even faster innovation in switching PSU's (and amps), than there already is, again longer term, i.e. years ahead not months.


----------



## Triode User

Em2016 said:


> A quick Google lead me to this. I don't know if it's related as it relates to external PSU's but maybe it is related. Hopefully Rob can share if any of the above I mentioned has any accuracy to it.
> 
> https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topi...gy-efficient-products/external-power-supplies
> 
> To re-iterate, I wasn't told that linear PSU's would be outright banned. I was told that the regulations would instead make linear PSU's non-viable, long term... And the main point of our discussion was that this would drive even faster innovation in switching PSU's (and amps), than there already is, again longer term, i.e. years ahead not months.



Many thanks. So the one word summary is efficiency. 

As an aside and reading that link I wonder if items such as the PS Audio power regenerators will get caught in the requirement as they certainly add significant energy loss to the chain (they get quite hot). But that is a distraction to the thread and just idle curiosity.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 11, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Many thanks. So the one word summary is efficiency.



Your one word is nicer but 'emissions targets' may tell a little more of the story, albeit with an extra word. All related of course.



Triode User said:


> As an aside and reading that link I wonder if items such as the PS Audio power regenerators will get caught in the requirement as they certainly add significant energy loss to the chain (they get quite hot).



That may come under 'power transformers' ?

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-products/power-transformers

A good question to pose to Paul on the PSA Forum. He's very open and may shed light on if it applies to them and if so, he may even give timelines.


----------



## Triode User

Em2016 said:


> That may come under 'power transformers' ?
> https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-products/power-transformers
> A good question to pose to Paul on the PSA Forum. He's very open and may shed light on if it applies to them and if so, he may even give timelines.



That link includes this text, "These requirements mainly cover minimum energy efficiency levels of transformers with a minimum power rating of 1kVA that are used in 50 Hz electricity networks or in industrial applications." So you may be right. Although I do occasionally dip into the PSA forum I doubt me bringing this up there will add anything to the party.

An interesting diversion though and thanks for your responses.


----------



## dac64

Em2016 said:


> As a backdrop to all this, I've been told by another expert that EU regulations will soon/eventually make linear PSU's non-viable, and this will force a global change.



OT: I heard this couple of yeas ago! My first impression was those monster EU made pure class A will be gone with the winds!

However, these can be made outside EU, and their biggest market wasn't EU at all!


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 12, 2018)

dac64 said:


> OT: I heard this couple of yeas ago! My first impression was those monster EU made pure class A will be gone with the winds!
> 
> However, these can be made outside EU, and their biggest market wasn't EU at all!



Ha agreed, some companies may be able to get away with possibly ignoring the EU market.

But not all. And for those, I can't imagine you'd make a particular model device for the EU market (using switching PSU's or amps) and another model for the 'rest of the world' (using linear PSU or Class A amplification). Those can be significantly different designs. I guess this is why this person thinks long term (years ahead, not months) this will force global changes.

I'm really only (harmlessly) guessing now. I really don't know and don't pretend to know.

But yes, let's let the rest of the convo go back to Qutest


----------



## jayz

dac64 said:


> OT: I heard this couple of yeas ago! My first impression was those monster EU made pure class A will be gone with the winds!



More likely there will be an upper power threshold for domestic home entertainment systems. 

There are Class A headphone amps rated just 2W, then there are elaborate marketing badges for amplifier class e.g. class xD all of which make technical classifications a difficult route to regulate and police.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 12, 2018)

I take full responsibility for this EU Ecodesign diversion chat but don't want it to take over this particular thread, out of respect to Chord and current and potential Qutest customers.

Let's get back to Qutest chat.

@Skampmeister is Qutest still growing on you? You're having to re-listen to your entire library again? That's how it was with Hugo2 for me


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> The accepted wisdom is that linear PSU's are the best, and that switchers are the worst, and I too bought into that prejudice some 5 years ago. But with the Hugo 1 project, my first portable DAC, you absolutely have to use switcher regulators from an efficiency POV.
> 
> And here is what is strange - the switchers sounded much better than the linear regulators - and - the DAC measured better too. Now the measurements were easy to understand, and its down to FPGA core noise being much lower with switchers than with linear, due to efficiency issues. But the improved sound quality? That was actually down to lower RF noise.
> 
> ...



Thank you so very much for the thorough reply.  I appreciate that you take the time to answer questions about products you engineer, help design, and produce.  Thanks again.


----------



## Chiswickian

Rob, yes, thank you very much for taking time to provide such comprehensive responses to our questions.  I think we all really appreciate it, I certainly do.

I've been chatting with Paul Hynes over the last couple of weeks and pointed him to your comments and he came back to me with some very detailed and very interesting explanations regards his PSU design methodologies.  I suspect you guys could have some incredible conversations together!

Cheers.


----------



## daredevil_kk (Mar 13, 2018)

Here is a brief review of the Qutest vs my old Anedio DAC.

I allowed the Qutest to run in for about 2 weeks and had serious listening session using the Aurender N10 via the digital BNC connection and using the HP touchpad charger(test as one of the best for ripple, noise, impulse interference, cable quality, current and voltage regulation, and construction quality by my group of friends) to power it. The rest of my setup is a Spectral DMA-15 preamp, Aspen Soraya power amps and a pair of March 1 Acoustics custom bookshelf speakers.

Tonality it is very similar to the D2 on the neutral side, but with slightly more tight bass. I believe that it is because the timing and phase is so accurate that it reduces the effect of the room node cancellation. At first listening, it seems to be a little brighter, but it is was actually due to the better resolution, hence you can hear more details in the music. The micro dynamics are better as well, giving a nice texture and attack to the picking of the strings and the “skin” of the drums in the music.

The timing and pacing of the music is similarly accurate and well time as the D2.

As for the soundstage, the width and the positioning is very similar to the D2, but the main difference is the depth, there is more depth with the Qutest and it is also easier to discern the different instruments and voices. However, the vocals are now a just a touch too far back into the soundstage for my liking, if the voices were to take a step forward, it would be perfect for me.

My wife also find it less “noisy” and she can listen to the music and hold a conversation easier. I believe it is due the lower distortion in the music.

Overall, it is a nice upgrade from the D2 and strong buy recommendation as a pure DAC.


----------



## jayz

daredevil_kk said:


> Here is a brief review of the Qutest vs my old Anedio DAC.
> 
> I allowed the Qutest to run in for about 2 weeks and had serious listening session using the Aurender N10 via the digital BNC connection and using the HP touchpad charger(test as one of the best for ripple, noise, impulse interference, cable quality, current and voltage regulation, and construction quality by my group of friends) to power it. The rest of my setup is a Spectral DMA-15 preamp, Aspen Soraya power amps and a pair of March 1 Acoustics custom bookshelf speakers.
> 
> ...




That's a great listening space you have there. Bet those speakers disappear when music comes on  

Your listening impressions are close to mine. Interesting the comment about soundstage depth because I actually like the fact that it extends further. The increase of depth would mean some instruments/vocals are further back while others may be further afront?. Also I noticed that especially in classical recordings, more of the acoustics of the venue come through. I had a few hires recordings of LSO downloaded from B&W's Society of Sound and I hadn't quite appreciated the true meaning of hi resolution recordings until now  - not necessarily hi bit depth/rate but the amount of detail captured in a recording.


----------



## daredevil_kk

I guess that the thing about soundstage. Some like to sit up front and others like to sit at the back of the concert hall. I do like the depth of the soundstage a lot. Just that if I have my way as the conductor, I would have dragged the singer forward a little. After all, they should be the highlight of the band, right?

And yup the system just disappeared when the curtain are drawn and the lights are off.


----------



## agedbest

For those who want to get into and understand better why it is important to have a good power source.............

*From John Swenson, October 28, 2017*
Leakage current has been around since AC power went into houses. All AC power supplies have it in some form, including linear supplies. In the 60s a couple engineers actually measured and modeled leakage current in audio systems. Given the time frame it was all from linear supplies, SMPS were a long way in the future. Different LPS implementations turn out to have significant differences in the leakage they produce.

In the audio realm the effects of leakage that were important concerned generating voltages across loads and sources, even with tube circuits these are usually significantly less than 1 Mega Ohm, thus in what I am calling the "low impedance" range.

This analysis of leakage current became quite important in the emerging medical instrumentation business (heart monitors etc), since electrical equipment was being deliberately connected to human bodies it was very important to know if this leakage current could be dangerous to humans. Since they are worried about mA range of current the leakage that was important had to be fairly low impedance to generate significant current. Thus a LOT of leakage analysis, testing tools, testing standards etc were focused on low impedance leakage. It was not specifically decided to ignore high impedance, but the effects of interest could only be produced by low impedance leakage, so that is what was studied.

The result of this was that all leakage testing was done with circuits and test equipment that was designed to work at 1 Mega Ohm or less. With linear supplies this was perfectly sufficient.

Then along came SMPS. It turns out that SMPS are very different with regard to leakage then LPS. First is frequency, linear leakage is power line frequency related (60, 120, 180 etc), but SMPS have a huge range of frequencies due to the switching nature of their operation. They ALSO include the traditional 60, 120, 180 etc.

SMPS have been extensively tested for leakage, but it has been done with all the existing test equipment and methodologies, thus focusing on low impedance leakage.

Unfortunately it turns out that SMPS also include a high impedance component to their leakage, this is way above 1 Mega Ohms. The problem is that the existing test equipment and methodologies shunt this high impedance leakage to ground so they never see it. So nobody knew it was there. This high impedance leakage is significantly higher in intensity than the traditional low impedance leakage, so it can actually have a significantly larger affect on audio systems than traditional leakage, but nobody knew it was there.

Do not confuse the high impedance with high frequency. The SMPS contains high and low impedance components at all frequencies. Thus even at 60 Hz, there are both high and low components. This MUST mean that there are at least two different mechanisms contributing to the leakage simultaneously. One with a high impedance and one with a low impedance. The same thing happens at the higher frequencies. That amplitude ratio between high and low impedance varies with frequency (this is varies radically from one model to another), but both components seem to exist across the frequency range.

Currently I do NOT know what these mechanisms ARE, just that they must exist due to the behavior of the leakage. So please don't ask what is causing this, I don't know.

If you have leakage from a source (PS), it can show up in several ways. One is direct flow to earth ground. If the PS that is the source of the leakage has an electrical path to something that is grounded (such as a DAC, preamp, poweramp etc), maybe an interconnect, USB cable, Ethernet cable etc, the leakage current will create a voltage across the impedance of the cable, frequently the "ground wire" or shield of the cable. This can add noise to the intended signal. This is how leakage current has traditionally shown up in audio systems, as low frequency "hum or buzz" at the preamp or poweramp, because they were grounded.

Another way leakage can get into systems is through a DAC, the leakage current can go through the ground plane of the DAC PCB, that current creates a small voltage which modulates the oscillators(s) producing the clocks in the DAC, adding jitter to those clocks. Even if the leakage doesn't get to a preamp or power amp it can add jitter to the clock in the DAC, thus subtly distorting audio output.

This leakage from a computer through a DAC has been particularly important in computer audio since most computers are powered by SMPS.

In both the above cases the leakage here is composed of both the high impedance and low impedance components.

The leakage current does not have to go directly to an earth ground, it can also go from one power supply to another power supply, even if both have two prong plugs. This is what I have called a leakage loop. I have already written extensively about leakage loops so I am not going to go into it here.

So how do I know high impedance leakage exists and how do I measure it? A couple months ago I was looking into leakage current and was trying out several different detector circuits and started seeing very strange results that didn't make any sense. I ran a whole bunch of tests on different SMPS models and had a hard time coming up with correlations, things just were not making any sense.

I was trying to figure out what could be causing this. After many weeks of trying different things it started to look like the leakage might be very high impedance (over a hundred Mega Ohms). A few simple tests confirmed that this was in fact true. (I still didn't know it was BOTH high and low at the same time). But that presented a quandary, how in the world do you measure that. All my test equipment maxed out at 10 Mega Ohms which make it impossible to properly measure such high impedance signals. It turned out I couldn't even buy test equipment for this (at least not that I had any chance of affording) so I had to build my own. That took a little while to design and build, but I finally had a differential probe with around 10 Giga Ohms input impedance, AND very low noise.

With this tool I could now properly measure this very high impedance leakage. Unfortunately it was STILL doing really weird things. Another round of tests revealed that the leakage was composed of both a high impedance and low impedance part at the SAME frequency. Wow that was something I had not anticipated. I devised a series of tests to check this and sure enough, the results clearly showed both a high impedance and low impedance component at the same time from the same supply.

Unfortunately this makes dealing with leakage way more complicated than I had ever imagined. All the methods I had been using and discussing for getting rid of leakage were all focused on the low impedance component, which work for that, but frequently don't touch the high impedance components.

So how do you deal with leakage now that we know about both the high and low impedance components? It turns out that there is no single method that works well for both, so you have to come up with different methods, one for high and one for low and figure out how to apply them together.

There are two broad categories of how to stop leakage:
1) series block
2) shunt

Series block sticks something in series with the leakage path which prevents the leakage from going through. But in order to be useful it has to let whatever the signal is go through. This manifests itself with various isolation schemes that have been tried over the years. These work by increasing the impedance to the leakage, but still letting the signal go through. These work fairly well for the low impedance components, but the rise in impedance for the leakage is not nearly high enough to block high impedance components, they sail right through these isolation mechanisms.

This is where the shunt comes in. It turns out it is very to get the high impedance components to shunt around your sensitive components, instead of trying to block them, you just make them go somewhere else. The easiest way to do this is to shunt them to ground and the power supply itself. It CAN be done in other parts of the system, but shunting to ground at the source is the easiest way to deal with it.

Unfortunately the shunt does not deal with the low impedance part. So you need to do BOTH the shunt to ground and the series block. THAT will get rid of it all.

The series block is going to be different depending on what the "signal" is. For a power supply the "signal" is DC power. So just sticking in a resistor is not going to work, it will block the leakage but it also blocks DC. SO you need to get more creative. A magnetic circuit that passes DC but blocks 60Hz and up would work, but that is very large, heavy and expensive. This is where the LPS-1 comes in, it blocks all low frequency leakage, but does not block the very high impedance leakage. So use either an LPS to drive it or an SMPS whose output is grounded to shunt the high impedance component.

For high frequency signals such as Ethernet the existing transformers are sufficient to block the low impedance components of leakage. Leakage even from SMPS is still significantly lower in frequency than Ethernet signalling so a properly designed transformer will have a high enough impedance at the lower frequencies to block the low impedance components, but NOT the high impedance components. SO you still need to shunt the high impedance components and the transformer will take care of the low.

Theoretically you could do the same with USB, BUT USB is not just AC, it requires DC connectivity through the data pair, so a transformer will not work. This has made series blocking very difficult to deal with. There are a few solutions, but none of them block the high impedance components, so you still need to shunt the all the high impedance source before they get to the USB cable if you want to stop ALL the leakage from getting through to a DAC. 

Stopping the low impedance leakage from getting through an audio interconnect is a difficult task. The leakage and the audio are in exactly the same frequency range so you can't separate them that way. The only known way to do this is with a balanced system. In many cases the leakage will be the same on both signal wires, but the audio will be differential, a proper differential input can block the leakage. BUT most implementation will NOT stop the high impedance component, so you STILL need to short it out before it gets there. Unfortunately not all balanced system are created equal. There are several implementations that do the differential input in such a way that it still doesn't block low impedance leakage. So a differential input MAY block low impedance leakage, it may not. Its best to get rid of it before it ever gets to the audio section in the first place. 

Wow that was a lot longer than I thought. I hope this makes sense and is useful to people.

John Swenson

============


----------



## jayz

Now I am sure there must be some good things in what John says but it is all about context right ? 

Actually if he did a DAC worthy of consideration then in that context, I would probably get a power supply he recommends  - you know as in get a DAC from a particular designer and also take his recommendations on power supply etc etc etc.

Outwith that context, well, hmm, ......... meh


----------



## JWahl

daredevil_kk said:


> Overall, it is a nice upgrade from the D2 and strong buy recommendation as a pure DAC.



Nice Photos.  Good to hear it is a decent upgrade.  I owned the D1 quite earlier in my journey.  It was decent, but I've since owned many other preferred DACs (Mostly Schiit Multibit and the Mojo) to those older Sabre implementations.  As far as older Sabre's, I used to like the Resonessence stuff, having owned the Concero and Concero HP.  I mention that here, because I consider that my "Gateway" to trying the Chord DACs.  The Concero opened my eyes to what can be done with FPGAs and custom filtering.  I used to only think good DACs had to have big monster power supplies and output stages to sound good.  Though, those still can help.

Looking forward to receiving my Qutest in the near future.  I noticed some Canadian dealers are getting stock, so hopefully the U.S. will be soon.


----------



## Chiswickian

I see What Hi-Fi? appear to quite like the Qutest... https://www.whathifi.com/chord/qutest/review


----------



## plsvn

jayz said:


> Actually if he did a DAC worthy of consideration then in that context, I would probably get a power supply he recommends - you know as in get a DAC from a particular designer and also take his recommendations on power supply etc etc etc.
> 
> Outwith that context, well, hmm, ......... meh



https://bottlehead.com/product/bottlehead-dac/


----------



## rudy49

anyone compare the Qutest to the Rega DAC-R?


----------



## gintamafans

plsvn said:


> not Rob Watts  but... I'm powering mine from an UpTone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2 rated for 1.1A max



Any impression so far on the pair? Looking forward buying the ultracap


----------



## plsvn

gintamafans said:


> Any impression so far on the pair? Looking forward buying the ultracap



as everything in my main system is powered either by LPSes or from a balanced isolation transformer I never tried the Qutest with its stock SMPS
all I can say is... it definitely is a sensible upgrade from the 2Qute, powered by an UpTone Audio JS-2, it replaced 

I tried the Qutest with stock SMPS only in my secondary system then replaced it with the 2Qute powered by a TeraDak 12v LPS and... can’t really say I was missing the Qutest, there


----------



## dmance

plsvn said:


> ... can’t really say I was missing the Qutest, there



Whaaat??  2Qute and Qutest were close with a better external PSU?


----------



## plsvn (Mar 16, 2018)

dmance said:


> Whaaat??  2Qute and Qutest were close with a better external PSU?



 ... in my secondary system, replacing Aries Mini’s internal DAC: the difference made by either the 2Qute or Qutest, *there*, is so huge that the 2Qute is already more than what I need to be happy 
(this system too is either on LPS, Aries Mini using Aries femto’s LPS, or battery powered, RWA Signature 15)


----------



## rudy49

has anyone compared the Qutest to the NAD D1050?  the NAD is very good even though it is 5 years old now.


----------



## koven

I'm torn between Qutest and Hugo 2 since H2 can be had for $2100 used... and has more function and portability.


----------



## jayz (Mar 17, 2018)

rudy49 said:


> has anyone compared the Qutest to the NAD D1050?  the NAD is very good even though it is 5 years old now.



Not the 1050 but I had the NAD M51 a while back. It had a mellow smooth top end which suited my setup at the time. There were several firmware versions each sounded different at the bottom end, overall balance suited my passive setup at the time. Headfi has a dedicated thread for M51 where you will find numerous claims of how it sounds detailed yet without being harsh, analog-like in general. I liked the digital volume control of the M51 and I could feed it straight into monoblocks with no loss of resolution - at least I didn't hear any loss at low SPLs.

My own interpretation of what detail is, has also changed over the years. The greatest revelation with Qutest has been its ability to paint almost a perfect three dimensional picture of the performance especially the improvement to depth perception. Even with less than ideal recordings, individual vocalists and instruments have a sense of completeness and separation irrespective of how loud or quiet they are heard so from that perspective, the word detail has taken a new meaning. I've also noticed I no longer try to gauge how tight and articulate the low end is or focus on details of high frequencies because everything sounds just right. The last time I experienced a jump in performance of this magnitude (or more) was the move from my previous passive setup to an active system.


----------



## andromeda1954

koven said:


> I'm torn between Qutest and Hugo 2 since H2 can be had for $2100 used... and has more function and portability.


If you don't need a amp take the Qutest , sounds better  than the Hugo 2 .


----------



## flea22

Hey guys, I'm looking for a dac upgrade for my gen 1 woo audio wa7, would this be a good option or would this be overkill for a lower value headphone amp, my headphones are lcd 3
Cheers.


----------



## VRDS

[... Even with less than ideal recordings, individual vocalists and instruments have a sense of completeness and separation irrespective of how loud or quiet they are heard so from that perspective, the word detail has taken a new meaning. I've also noticed I no longer try to gauge how tight and articulate the low end is or focus on details of high frequencies because everything sounds just right ...[/QUOTE]
And that´s what I think about my 2Qute too. Maybe that´s true for any of the Chord DACs or where they really shine.
I think playing High Res files there are several DACs which could sound quite good, but playing 16/44, not perfect recordings or quite low volume the 2Qute still sounds good and right. 
And I just listen to music now and don´t care for details which was not before.


----------



## Emerald Core

I've purchased Sennheiser HD660s (on the way) and going to buy the Qutest as well. I am still undecided of what pre/power headamp i need to pair them with.


----------



## gordec

The Qutest has no preamp right vs Hugo 2 has DAC and Preamp section? I’m researching for a new DAC mostly for desktop setup.


----------



## mentt

Is There power button or any other way how to safely turn of the qutest? Or is better to let it run 24x7?


----------



## dmance

gordec said:


> The Qutest has no preamp right vs Hugo 2 has DAC and Preamp section? I’m researching for a new DAC mostly for desktop setup.


I am buying a Qutest for desktop USB-only use and perfectly okay with digital volume control from JRiver setting 32-bit playback.


----------



## maxh22

dmance said:


> I am buying a Qutest for desktop USB-only use and perfectly okay with digital volume control from JRiver setting 32-bit playback.



When you get it can you do a comparison versus your H2? There seems to be a consensus that Qutest as a DAC is better than Hugo 2 but we could use some more impressions to get a better picture.


----------



## PanusKatus

mentt said:


> Is There power button or any other way how to safely turn of the qutest? Or is better to let it run 24x7?



Leave it on.


----------



## dawktah2

Any word on North American ship date?

...


----------



## mmwwmm

Rob Watts said:


> Yes I too saw that... But 2 qute, although having a discrete op stage, is not powerful; it was never intended to drive any low impedance at all. Qutest op stage has been upgraded, but it's not the same as Hugo 2. The op impedance has not been measured, so any mention of it is an error. But I have increased the drive on the discrete op stage, and I have used the Mojo op stage. This has the benefit of being very small, but capable of delivering large currents. But let's be clear; qutest was designed as a DAC only! As an aside, the Mojo op stage is the same as Hugo 2 electronically, but differs with the packaging and power delivery of the op transistors.



Does the qutest output stage use the same number of op paralelled transistors per channel as the Mojo? or may qutest, being a line device without much power needed, uses a more simple layout with just one op transistor per channel? Just curious about that.
Thanks!


----------



## Light - Man

mentt said:


> Is There power button or any other way how to safely turn of the qutest? Or is better to let it run 24x7?



Yes, I believe there is a power button and it is up to you whether you think it is prudent to leave it on 24/7 but I reckon a typical warm up time of 20-30 minutes is usually sufficient and this also applies to amps, etc.


----------



## Skampmeister

Light - Man said:


> Yes, I believe there is a power button and it is up to you whether you think it is prudent to leave it on 24/7 but I reckon a typical warm up time of 20-30 minutes is usually sufficient and this also applies to amps, etc.



No, there isn’t a power button. Pull the plug is the only option


----------



## Light - Man

Skampmeister said:


> No, there isn’t a power button. Pull the plug is the only option



Are you sure there is not a power/standby button? I know the 2Qute did not have either.


----------



## Skampmeister

Light - Man said:


> Are you sure there is not a power/standby button? I know the 2Qute did not have either.



I own a Qutest, so I’m pretty sure.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Light - Man said:


> Are you sure there is not a power/standby button? I know the 2Qute did not have either.



An owner here too. No buttons. Either pull the plug or 24/7 on.


----------



## agedbest

also no fuse circuit protection on it


Joe-Siow said:


> An owner here too. No buttons. Either pull the plug or 24/7 on.


----------



## andromeda1954

Light - Man said:


> Are you sure there is not a power/standby button? I know the 2Qute did not have either.


The Qutest is designed to leave it on.


----------



## dmance

andromeda1954 said:


> The Qutest is designed to leave it on.


...for best sound quality?  Or because a power switch would ruin the design aesthetic?
If the former, it puts into doubt my interest in an AC-mains isolating battery bank for Qutest. Grrrr.


----------



## Skampmeister

I bought a battery for mine, don’t use it now, made zero difference compared to the stock PSU.


----------



## PanusKatus

I have a Qutest. It has no off-on switch.


----------



## PanusKatus

I see MCRU already have a £235 LPS out especially for the Qutest.


----------



## Joe-Siow

agedbest said:


> also no fuse circuit protection on it



I don't know about the rest. I usually do not off my electronics other than my preamp (tube) and power amp (Class A). Unless I'm going away for long.


----------



## Rob Watts (Mar 22, 2018)

mmwwmm said:


> Does the qutest output stage use the same number of op paralelled transistors per channel as the Mojo? or may qutest, being a line device without much power needed, uses a more simple layout with just one op transistor per channel? Just curious about that.
> Thanks!


Yes it's the same number and transistor packaging as Mojo.

And no power button - as Qutest only consumes a modest couple of Watts.


----------



## mmwwmm

Rob Watts said:


> Yes it's the same number and transistor packaging as Mojo.



Thanks Rob!


----------



## Christer (Mar 23, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> I own a Qutest, so I’m pretty sure.


I also own a Qutest and there is NO on /off button or switch.
Plugging it  in and out is the only option to turn it on or off.
Nor did it come with any remote which  the portable HUGO 2 obviously is delivered with.


----------



## Skampmeister

I think we have all established by now that there’s no on/off switch.


----------



## Christer (Mar 23, 2018)

Skampmeister said:


> I think we have all established by now that there’s no on/off switch.




Agreed and before I might be accused of "throwing grenades" again with my input, I would like to add that I quite like Qutest with most of my hi res tracks playing via my Benchmark headphone amp . And even on a low res Yoga Nidra mp3 track the absence of  sibilance that was very annoying on HUGO is  now gone.
I just  had to play that track via my Benchmark DAC2 before.
Could it be the addition of galvanic isolation  delivering  its magic or are  the added taps fully responsible?
Anyway I am quite happy with my Qutest even with a cheapish ,different company, "Chord Clearway" cable, for the time being,I might add, into my Benchmark headphone amp. An M'scaler at a  reasonable price might  be what would catapult Qutest into even higher territory if my initial auditions under slightly less than ideal conditions prove  right.
It is a VERY CLEAR advance over HUGO.  Much more resolving and especially with some old 1970s analogue classical stuff like the classic DECCA  Turandot 24/96 now  very enjoyable compared to HUGO which sounded hard and harsh and flat in comparison.
Still no DAVE or DAVE BLU2 or Dcs  for that matter, but much better than HUGO imho.
PS. I might see some of you guys tomorrow at Singapore Can Jam. I'm in town  again,and have just attended a  great live SSO Concert at the Esplanade tonight.  Highlights imho, were a contempory work by a local composer from Singapore Kelly Tang 's Three Symphomic Dances and Mozart's  glorious symphony  Nr 38 played by a large  orchestra for a change.
Absolutely brillant stuff live. I half expected to see Rob there but I did no spot him there.Nor at the Adelphi.
Cheers Christer


----------



## Light - Man

Re:  *"throwing grenades" again*

Christer, you better not leave any of your bags unattended at the Adelphi or anywhere else, especially if Rob is in the vicinity as you may very likely be carted off by security and we might never hear from you again!


----------



## eric1974

I am waiting on Qutest availability in the US and need advice on what PC or Mac configuration will enable the Qutest to accurately receive bit-perfect music files with minimal USB noise (is noise truly a risk with the Qutest?).  First, I'm confused about the noise issue in general.  If computers send the original music file accurately (and that should be the case with any external usb drive, hard drive, etc.), does the Qutest design prevent/clean up any noise interference once it's in the Qutest before the dac starts processing the source music file?  If so, then does it matter what computer you choose as your digital file source, provided your settings in iTunes, Audirvana, etc. do not upsample or make any other changes to the original flac, aiff or other source file?  And secondly, does anyone see an additional problem in using my MacBook as the digital source, where the single USB-c output connects to a USB-c hub with regular USB ports where one is for an external hard drive where music files reside and another USB port for the Qutest connection?

Thanks in advance for helping me get started!


----------



## bmfmarius

Buy the sotm 200 or 200 ultra streamer! Connect the Qutest to the streamer (USB) and you are set!!!
If you really want to use a computer, buy the Mac..! But they don't compare with the sotm!


----------



## soares (Mar 24, 2018)

If you’re using USB, in order to have the optimal sound from the Dac you absolutely need to buy a Mrendu or a Ultrarendu  (http://www.sonore.us/ultraRendu.html, or also look elsewhere, for instance an SOTM sMS-200 or a sMS-200ultra (http://www.sotm-audio.com/sotmwp/english/portfolio-item/sms-200ultra/). Here again there’s a huge increase in sound quality if you use a a LPS. Please note that in my system , the Sboosters were much better than the Ultracap LPS-1, at least with the Mrendu and the UltraRendu. I have the two.  Can’t advice on the SOMT’s , because I never tried them. This results were obtained using the2qute, a nano black edition and an Oppo205 as Dacs. Can't comment on the Qutest, but I guess you will have the same results. As a source, there was not big differences between my Macbook and a sonic transporter i5. I am using roon as sodtware. Regards, Jorge


----------



## koven

maxh22 said:


> When you get it can you do a comparison versus your H2? There seems to be a consensus that Qutest as a DAC is better than Hugo 2 but we could use some more impressions to get a better picture.



I thought Hugo 2 and Qutest DAC specs are the same?


----------



## eric1974

Thanks for the advice on going a different direction with the sms-200 or rendu. I'm reading about them now, so a new learning curve on yet another hardware device! I assume under these designs that I still use my external hard drive connected to the Mac where my music files are located, but that instead of a direct USB connection to the MAC, I use my local wifi network to communicate with the sms-200 or rendu via Roon to play music of my choice. Or, is a wired ethernet connection to the sms-200 required?  Anyway, just starting to learn about this!


----------



## bmfmarius

Wired is the best way


----------



## soares

eric1974 said:


> Thanks for the advice on going a different direction with the sms-200 or rendu. I'm reading about them now, so a new learning curve on yet another hardware device! I assume under these designs that I still use my external hard drive connected to the Mac where my music files are located, but that instead of a direct USB connection to the MAC, I use my local wifi network to communicate with the sms-200 or rendu via Roon to play music of my choice. Or, is a wired ethernet connection to the sms-200 required?  Anyway, just starting to learn about this!


Wired is the best way... By the way I am also using 2 TPlink 200 for the ethernet input.


----------



## dolphy007

Why use a PC or MAC? I'm using an Auralic Aires and I couldn't be happier. I'd be using a Bluesound Node if I didn't have the Aires. 

They are one box solutions with minimal optimisation required.


----------



## eric1974

Thanks everyone for your insights on alternatives to PC or MAC.  Since I already have an external USB-C drive with music files attached to my MacBook, I will invest the money in an additional component such as the SMS-200 Ultra only if the Chord Qutest benefits from the USB connection between the SMS, for example, vs the MAC USB connection.  Perhaps an insight from Mr. Watts: Do you need a cleaner USB signal to accurately transfer digital files to the internal dac (and therefore would benefit from a SMS-200) or does your proprietary design "clean up" any noisy transfers and do equally well with a computer USB port output?  Has anyone done an A/B comparison between these two alternatives to a Chord dac? Perhaps other dacs need an SMS-200 but less needed by Qutest?


----------



## soares

Can't help with it. I am still waiting for my Qutest, but The rendus provide for much more than a simple clean signal. If it's just that you need you might consider an ISO Regen. Good luck Erick


----------



## GSP_

eric1974 said:


> I am waiting on Qutest availability in the US and need advice on what PC or Mac configuration will enable the Qutest to accurately receive bit-perfect music files with minimal USB noise (is noise truly a risk with the Qutest?).  First, I'm confused about the noise issue in general.  If computers send the original music file accurately (and that should be the case with any external usb drive, hard drive, etc.), does the Qutest design prevent/clean up any noise interference once it's in the Qutest before the dac starts processing the source music file?  If so, then does it matter what computer you choose as your digital file source, provided your settings in iTunes, Audirvana, etc. do not upsample or make any other changes to the original flac, aiff or other source file?  And secondly, does anyone see an additional problem in using my MacBook as the digital source, where the single USB-c output connects to a USB-c hub with regular USB ports where one is for an external hard drive where music files reside and another USB port for the Qutest connection?
> 
> Thanks in advance for helping me get started!




If I were you, I’d get the Qutest in hand & hooked up to your system before adding additional components. Folks on this forum have good hearts, but sometimes they’ll try to convince you that you must have certain additions when said additions may not add much to your personal listening experience. 

For reference: I run an outboard DAC fed lossless via MacBook Pro USB, to quality home audio equipment - and it’s quite well done. When I get a qutest, it’ll simply be plug-n-play & enjoy.


----------



## Christer

Light - Man said:


> Re:  *"throwing grenades" again*
> 
> Christer, you better not leave any of your bags unattended at the Adelphi or anywhere else, especially if Rob is in the vicinity as you may very likely be carted off by security and we might never hear from you again!


"Not to worry  Chicken  Curry" I was neither stopped nor security searched,and Rob  responded to  a question I asked at his seminar yesterday.


----------



## dac64

Christer said:


> "Not to worry  Chicken  Curry" I was neither stopped nor security searched,and Rob  responded to  a question I asked at his seminar yesterday.



What did you ask,and were you satisfied with the answer?

And, any thing news to share with us? TIA


----------



## Satir (Mar 25, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> There seems to be a consensus that Qutest as a DAC is better than Hugo 2 but we could use some more impressions to get a better picture.



Consensus? Who in said consensus has both Qutest and Hugo 2 long enough to make such an assertion? The Qutest has been out how long?


----------



## Dababy

Anyone have any impressions comparing the Schiit Gumby and the Chord Qutest? I got the chance to hear a DAVE in my setup alongside my gumby and it wiped the floor with it. The DAVE was more musical, clearer, and more engaging. So how would the Qutest compare?


----------



## dawktah2 (Mar 25, 2018)

Dababy said:


> Anyone have any impressions comparing the Schiit Gumby and the Chord Qutest? I got the chance to hear a DAVE in my setup alongside my gumby and it wiped the floor with it. The DAVE was more musical, clearer, and more engaging. So how would the Qutest compare?



DAVE was introduced in 2015, correct?  Has there been any tech changes in the last 3 years that could have been incorporated into the Hugo2/Qutest that would make it sound as good as the DAVE?  Also, would Chord purposely hobble their products so they cannot sound as good?  I'm curious about this myself as a DAVE is more than I am willing to spend right now.


----------



## maxh22

Primum Audire said:


> Consensus? Who in said consensus has both Qutest and Hugo 2 long enough to make such an assertion? The Qutest has been out how long?



Several posters, search this thread. I'm sure in more time once people have both of them we will get a clearer idea of any differences.


----------



## koven

Doesn't Qutest have same specs/architecture as Hugo 2? Not sure how it can be more than marginally better.


----------



## Satir (Mar 26, 2018)

While we're speculating..

Users may find shorter signal path of Hugo 2 advantage in SQ over longer signal paths of Qutest connected to amplifier.


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts hey mate, is there any chance you can post a picture of the Qutest with its lid off, can’t find anything online. Cheers.


----------



## miketlse

Skampmeister said:


> @Rob Watts hey mate, is there any chance you can post a picture of the Qutest with its lid off, can’t find anything online. Cheers.


There was a picture posted a few weeks ago, I think on this thread, but I can't find it now.


----------



## Christer (Mar 27, 2018)

dac64 said:


> What did you ask,and were you satisfied with the answer?
> 
> And, any thing news to share with us? TIA



Hello dac64.
I asked if he could say when a separate M-Scaler without cd drive might become available and he responded that "he would be slapped" if he said when,more specifically.
But it is  definitely coming. And in the more distant future he was even hoping to  be able bring out a HUGO 3 or 4 with an M scaler already  onboard".
But such future things are still awaiting  FPGA developments and  capabilites not yet available.
During one of  his seminars he also mentioned that M-Scaler technology for full 24 bit reconstruction would need somewhere in the region of 256 million taps if my memory serves me right.
Something he did not expect to happen in his lifetime.
Nor did he think it would be needed.
We  also had a more informal, friendly private chat.
We shook hands afterwards and parted in peace.
He on his way to a four day hike to Macchu Picchu, and myself with the difficult decision to make between Alban Berg's Three Pieces for Orchestra and Brahms' Violin Concerto live here in Singapore on the 30th, or Beethoven and Mozart in Kuala Lumpur that same evening.
Cheers Christer


----------



## maxxevv

Christer said:


> Hello dac64.
> I asked if he could say when a separate M-Scaler without cd drive might become available and he responded that "he would be slapped" if he said when,more specifically.
> But it is  definitely coming. And in the more distant future he was even hoping to  be able bring out a HUGO 3 or 4 with an M scaler already  onboard".
> But such future things are still awaiting  FPGA developments and  capabilites not yet available.
> ...



Yes, Rob did say that.  I was there at the session. 

256 millions for 24 bits is correct.


----------



## Skampmeister

In regards to the Hugo2 vs the Qutest, I had a Hugo2 overnight here, listened for a few hours, had no interest in it at all, plugged my 2qute back in. Got the Qutest, see ya later 2qute.


----------



## azabu (Mar 28, 2018)

The Qutest finally arrived this morning and you guys are right, it ain't going anywhere 

The one thing that was surprising is the huge performance jump by using isolation feet.


----------



## koven

azabu said:


> The Qutest finally arrived this morning and you guys are right, it ain't going anywhere
> 
> The one thing that was surprising is the huge performance jump by using isolation feet.



If you think isolation feet resulted in a huge improvement, wait until you try this - http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm - the improvements will blow your mind!


----------



## Skampmeister

koven said:


> If you think isolation feet resulted in a huge improvement, wait until you try this - http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm - the improvements will blow your mind!



I’m hope your taking the piss.


----------



## azabu

koven said:


> If you think isolation feet resulted in a huge improvement, wait until you try this - http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm - the improvements will blow your mind!



LOL...


----------



## flyte3333

Christer said:


> And in the more distant future he was even hoping to be able bring out a HUGO 3 or 4 with an M scaler already onboard".



Very cool. The best cable is no cable! Everything in Rob's control inside the one housing.


koven said:


> If you think isolation feet resulted in a huge improvement, wait until you try this - http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm - the improvements will blow your mind!



These pebbles go on top of the DAC?

Can you post a photo of how they’re setup with your Qutest?


----------



## andycban (Mar 28, 2018)

Hi from Sydney, Oz. Have just bought a Qutest and very impressed so far.

One thing I would have liked though is the ability to control the volume via USB and have it attenuated digitally within the DAC. 
If it is already capable of a 3 level voltage output adjustment, would it have taken much more to implement?

My amp is a Musical fidelity m6si and volume is already handled in digital domain i believe. So thought the chord do just as good or a better job and be more convenient.  It uses a Burr Brown PGA 23201 precision ladder chip rather than analog control I've read.

Instead I have tried DSP volume in Roon (ie HT bypass on the amp plus Roon DSP volume)which perhaps might not be as good(?).  Needs more listening time to tell...


----------



## dolphy007

I’ve had the Qutest for nearly three weeks and I am surprised by how much of an improvement it is over the Hugo. 

For those of you using the USB interface, what cables are you using? I’m connecting an Auralic Aires to the Qutest. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## soares

azabu said:


> The Qutest finally arrived this morning and you guys are right, it ain't going anywhere
> 
> The one thing that was surprising is the huge performance jump by using isolation feet.


What kind of isolation feet are you using? Thanks.


----------



## panditji

koven said:


> If you think isolation feet resulted in a huge improvement, wait until you try this - http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm - the improvements will blow your mind!



Hehehe... by being on top of cables, they seem to squeeze out the best performance... But congratulations to the website owner to actually come up with such stuff and make a proper website to sell it...


----------



## U2nite

dolphy007 said:


> I’ve had the Qutest for nearly three weeks and I am surprised by how much of an improvement it is over the Hugo.
> 
> For those of you using the USB interface, what cables are you using? I’m connecting an Auralic Aires to the Qutest. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.



This is good: AudioQuest Cinnamon USB Micro 
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00G5N1GFY/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=A3PKSUAVGUP5IE&psc=1


----------



## teknorob23

dolphy007 said:


> I’ve had the Qutest for nearly three weeks and I am surprised by how much of an improvement it is over the Hugo.
> 
> For those of you using the USB interface, what cables are you using? I’m connecting an Auralic Aires to the Qutest. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.




I'm running Hugo2, so obviously not the same DAC, but the same cable connections. I auditioned 5 or 6 USB cables varying in cost from £30-250 and whereas usually i end up buying the most expensive i've gone with Supra USB cable which was £36. The timing to my ears, is near perfect and the sound is clean and true to the source.  I like the cable so much it led me try Supra's speaker cables and interconnects, all of which i now have in my domestic 2 channel set up. They are small Swedish company and value for money across the range is incredible.. Definitely worth a listen if you havent heard them


----------



## flyte3333

teknorob23 said:


> i've gone with Supra USB cable which was £36. The timing to my ears, is near perfect and the sound is clean and true to the source.



Great cables and not insanely priced. 90 ohm high speed certified for up to 15m too!


----------



## azabu

soares said:


> What kind of isolation feet are you using? Thanks.



I'm using just 1 x TAOC Tite-25MF, they're made from maple wood and cast iron. 

I have a lot of electronics on my desk, so the isolation works wonders in my set-up.


----------



## azabu

teknorob23 said:


> I'm running Hugo2, so obviously not the same DAC, but the same cable connections. I auditioned 5 or 6 USB cables varying in cost from £30-250 and whereas usually i end up buying the most expensive i've gone with Supra USB cable which was £36. The timing to my ears, is near perfect and the sound is clean and true to the source.  I like the cable so much it led me try Supra's speaker cables and interconnects, all of which i now have in my domestic 2 channel set up. They are small Swedish company and value for money across the range is incredible.. Definitely worth a listen if you havent heard them



Supra are quite popular in Japan, their cables are sold at Yodobashi Camera. Will check this usb out.


----------



## teknorob23

azabu said:


> Supra are quite popular in Japan, their cables are sold at Yodobashi Camera. Will check this usb out.



Cool it’ll be interesting to hear what you think


----------



## Christer

U2nite said:


> This is good: AudioQuest Cinnamon USB Micro
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00G5N1GFY/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=A3PKSUAVGUP5IE&psc=1


Hmm the Qutest has a galvanically isolated full size USB port, not the abominable micro one.


----------



## andromeda1954

dolphy007 said:


> I’ve had the Qutest for nearly three weeks and I am surprised by how much of an improvement it is over the Hugo.
> 
> For those of you using the USB interface, what cables are you using? I’m connecting an Auralic Aires to the Qutest. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


Audio Quest diamond ,expensive ,but makes the Qutest even sounds better.


----------



## jaspal kallar

andycban said:


> Hi from Sydney, Oz. Have just bought a Qutest and very impressed so far.
> 
> One thing I would have liked though is the ability to control the volume via USB and have it attenuated digitally within the DAC.
> If it is already capable of a 3 level voltage output adjustment, would it have taken much more to implement?
> ...




I'd be interested in your findings using the DSP Roon volume.  

I'm thinking about eventually getting a Qutest and go directly in high efficient speakers but I'm unsure how to control the volume.  

I've read of one other person who uses his 2qute controlling the volume with Jriver (into high efficient speakers).


----------



## soares

azabu said:


> I'm using just 1 x TAOC Tite-25MF, they're made from maple wood and cast iron.
> 
> I have a lot of electronics on my desk, so the isolation works wonders in my set-up.


Thank you so much Azabu!


----------



## U2nite

Christer said:


> Hmm the Qutest has a galvanically isolated full size USB port, not the abominable micro one.



Ah Yes. The micro USB is for the Hugo2.


----------



## azabu (Mar 29, 2018)

dolphy007 said:


> I’ve had the Qutest for nearly three weeks and I am surprised by how much of an improvement it is over the Hugo.
> 
> For those of you using the USB interface, what cables are you using? I’m connecting an Auralic Aires to the Qutest. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.



I have two desktop set-ups (Qutest / BHSE / Stax 007 and Sony TA-ZH1ES / Noble Encore), they both sound better with the Uptone Regen. As I only have the one Regen, I'll order the newer Iso Regen shortly.

The Phasure Lush and Curious USBs are both keepers, the two USBs I want to audition are the Oyaide Continental and Phasure Clairixa.


----------



## mentt

azabu said:


> The Qutest finally arrived this morning and you guys are right, it ain't going anywhere
> 
> The one thing that was surprising is the huge performance jump by using isolation feet.



Can you please post the link for those isolation feet?


----------



## azabu

mentt said:


> Can you please post the link for those isolation feet?



Here's a little info: http://absolutehiend.com/index.php/tite-25mf-hybrid-insulator.html

The only issue is they've been discontinued by TAOC. You can pick them up second hand: http://www.audiounion.jp/ct/detail/used/151197/

I'm sure you can find something else suitable.


----------



## Hifi Boy

Christer said:


> During one of  his seminars he also mentioned that M-Scaler technology for full 24 bit reconstruction would need somewhere in the region of 256 million taps if my memory serves me right.


1 down, 255 to go!


----------



## buzzlulu

azabu said:


> I have two desktop set-ups (Qutest / BHSE / Stax 007 and Sony TA-ZH1ES / Noble Encore)



Care to pass any judgement on a comparison between the Qutest and Sony TA?  I currently own the Sony which was bought to use exclusively with my Z1R's.  I use my Utopia's in my two channel system with a different source and amp.


----------



## dmance

jaspal kallar said:


> I'd be interested in your findings using the DSP Roon volume.
> 
> I'm thinking about eventually getting a Qutest and go directly in high efficient speakers but I'm unsure how to control the volume.
> 
> I've read of one other person who uses his 2qute controlling the volume with Jriver (into high efficient speakers).


That other person was me.  Since the native input bit resolution of Qutest is 32-bits, then JRiver has 8-bits of padding (256 levels) for 24-bit music or 16-bits (65k levels) for CD music.  Using the JRiver internal volume control, the processing is done at 64-bits then dithered down to 32-bits (set it to TPDF).  Even Rob Watts says that this will come very close to his highly noise shaped volume control ...and much, much better than any analog volume in a preamp.


----------



## dac64

Christer said:


> Hello dac64.
> I asked if he could say when a separate M-Scaler without cd drive might become available and he responded that "he would be slapped" if he said when,more specifically...
> Cheers Christer



Thanks for the info, and it was so much as if I were there!

Well, I'll wait for all three, blu, Da and MS to be presented before I decide which is best for my application.

I'd even consider Red Ref IV (blu + dave) if available, it does away those RF issues between blu and dave.


----------



## jaspal kallar

dmance said:


> That other person was me.  Since the native input bit resolution of Qutest is 32-bits, then JRiver has 8-bits of padding (256 levels) for 24-bit music or 16-bits (65k levels) for CD music.  Using the JRiver internal volume control, the processing is done at 64-bits then dithered down to 32-bits (set it to TPDF).  Even Rob Watts says that this will come very close to his highly noise shaped volume control ...and much, much better than any analog volume in a preamp.



In fact the other person I was thinking was @elviscaprice (who also posts on computeraudiophile.com) but nevertheless still appreciate your reply @dmance.


----------



## elviscaprice

Hello,
Sounds like, according to Rob, the Qutest has a bit more oomph over the 2Qute amp, for directly driving efficient speakers.  Paired with a mini m-scaler on the horizon may tempt me to make the jump.  Meanwhile, I am still enjoying the 2Qute.


----------



## FangJoker (Mar 31, 2018)

Will this ever be available in silver?


----------



## Hummer25 (Apr 1, 2018)

I will be very interested to hear what the Qutest sounds like with the next m-scaler, certainly a large uplift in sonics. Having heard what the m-scaler did to DAVE , I am expecting something significant.

Can anyone recommend the best route for connecting a MacBook Pro using Audirvana to a Chord Qutest. I was going to use USB as I believe Chord DACs don't suffer from jitter via this route. But if anyone has a better suggestion please let me know.


----------



## dmance

I'm still waiting for my Qutest to arrive.  While I wait, I am having second thoughts about a Chord DAC without Rob's wonderful transparent volume control.  Even attenuation at line level.  So Qutest would still have it's adjustable volt max level ...but be able to digital adjust downward.
I'm okay with jRiver quality digital volume for USB ...but then SPDIF does not have it...and that's becoming a show stopper.
...I don't want a Hugo2 and a Dave is too expensive. Grrr.


----------



## dhc0329 (Apr 3, 2018)

.


----------



## Christer (Apr 2, 2018)

Hummer25 said:


> I will be very interested to hear what the Qutest sounds like with the next m-scaler, certainly a large uplift in sonics. Having heard what the m-scaler did to DAVE , I am expecting something significant.
> 
> Can anyone recommend the best route for connecting a MacBook Pro using Audirvana to a Chord Qutest. I was going to use USB as I believe Chord DACs don't suffer from jitter via this route. But if anyone has a better suggestion please let me know.



I don't think there is anything special needed apart from simply connecting the Qutest via its full size galvanically isolated USB 2 port going out from Qutest into a MBP.

Anyway, that is what I have been doing for almost a month now since buying my Qutest here in Singapore.

I use no jitterbugs or other questionable  extra "cleansers" or re-clockers .
At his seminar at Can Jam in Singapore last week, Rob very much questioned the need for such things with his dacs..

Moreover I have to say Qutest  now sounds very good indeed with none of the often recurring problems I had with my HUGO.

I don't even think I could  reliably hear any differences between my old MBP plugged in or off battery.

This time around it seems like the dac is indeed pretty insensitive to RF and whatever can unexpectedly turn HUGO harsh ,hard  and thin and not very nice at times.

And Qutest is just SOO MUCH more resolving than HUGO. Not quite DAVE but clearly in a different league than HUGO imho.

With HUGO I can  very often hear the difference when my MBP is plugged in or not.
The first couple of weeks  with Qutest,there was a certain hardening in the treble on some tracks via Audirvana,which is gone now.
In the beginning I preferred the slightly softer sounding Pure Music  Player over Audirvana  on some complex heavily scored material.

But now I listen almost exlusively via Audirvana with my Qutest and so far via headphones only with Qutest connected to my Benchmark headphone amp.
I am not normally a strong believer in burn in effects and such. But it has opened up quite a bit from the first week.

And I am neither imaging things nor a victim of placebo.
I have my masterfiles where I know VERY WELL how they can and should sound, so some burn in time seems reasonable to expect.

Don't ask me why? I don't have a clue. I just report what I hear.
And I re-calibrate my ears/brain with live music on an almost daily basis here in Singapore.
I have only seen one review in one of the "British HIFI mags" of Qutest so far, and it seems they came to the same conclusion as me regarding the hardening in the treble at first.
Maybe they are not as deaf as I supposed after all?

Cheers Christer still stuck in Singapore, there is just so much good stuff going on here for me to leave just yet.
The SSO concert of Alban Berg's Three Pieces for Orchestra coupled with Bartok's Concert for Orchestra and Brahms' Violin Concerto turned  to be my most stunning live concert so far this season. And yesterday violinist Alina Ibramigowa and members of the SSO, played Shostakovich's equally stunning 3rd string quartet and some other Russian works at a chamber concert in Victoria Concert Hall.
PS I wonder if Rob is lugging around a DAVE on his hike to Machu Pichu or not?


----------



## Hummer25

Thanks for your comprehensive reply Christer, much appreciated as I am  going to be buying the Qutest shortly. Nice to hear from someone who has actually used the same set up as I am intending to use although I will be running my Qutest into a valve preamp but intend to use MacBook with Audirvana. I can imagine Qutest bridging the gap between Hugo and Dave but when the new m-scaler becomes available I expect the gap to be pretty close?

I have listened to all Chords DACs at great length as one of my mates is a dealer, lucky me! We have been wowed by each development along the way. Can you imagine the look on our faces going from Hugo to DAVE. When Blu2 and the m-scaler came in I could not believe the uplift in performance and this should not be underestimated by those who have not heard it.

My problem has always been once I Heard DAVE it is very hard going back to Hugo or Hugo2 especially as I will be listening to a full range system mainly and only occasionally headphones. I nearly bought the HugoTT but glad I waited till the Qutest became available as this hits the spot perfectly both financially, technically and sonically.

 I don't think it will be anytime soon we will see a cheap version of DAVE made available so the Qutest fits very well at the moment.


----------



## Christer (Apr 2, 2018)

Hummer25 said:


> Thanks for your comprehensive reply Christer, much appreciated as I am  going to be buying the Qutest shortly. Nice to hear from someone who has actually used the same set up as I am intending to use although I will be running my Qutest into a valve preamp but intend to use MacBook with Audirvana. I can imagine Qutest bridging the gap between Hugo and Dave but when the new m-scaler becomes available I expect the gap to be pretty close?
> 
> I have listened to all Chords DACs at great length as one of my mates is a dealer, lucky me! We have been wowed by each development along the way. Can you imagine the look on our faces going from Hugo to DAVE. When Blu2 and the m-scaler came in I could not believe the uplift in performance and this should not be underestimated by those who have not heard it.
> 
> ...



 Hello hummer 25,
I can easily imagine the look on your faces!
I too know what a difference DAVE and especially DAVE/BLU2 can make, especially with 16/44,1 pcm material. But I suspect from some still not ideal conditions auditions of BLU2/Quetest  via headphones only,that a separate M-scaler might close the gap between Dave on its own and Qutest or even beat it in some respects.
Rob was  "tight lipped" on exactly when, when I talked to him recently at Can Jam Singapore. But I am still pretty sure a separate M-scaler could take Qutest into current absolute SOTA territory with pcm.
On the other hand what surprises me maybe most with my Qutest is how really good  some of my  native  DSD recorded  reference masterfiles sound via Qutest and my HEKV2 into my Benchmark headphone amp.
Neither my HUGO nor my Benchmark  DAC 2 via its dac are anywhere near as clean, realistic and resolving as Qutest with DSD or pcm for that matter.
A real surprise for me considering Rob's known opinions on DSD that he could make it sound so good with the new filters in the Qutest.
You say you are going to connect your Qutest to a  valve preamp. Which one?
I will connect my Qutest to my MF 900 watts into 4ohm speaker load power amp directly first when I get home from Asia again, in a couple of months to drive my  really power-hungry  big electrostatic speakers.
If that does not work well I will also try the valve preamp/poweramp connection on my amp.And I will also try using my Benchmark preamp not only as now via headphones but also in my home system.
It is a very transparent pre amp and according to  some posters here a really good  idea might be to connect Qutest to this pre-amp and Benchmark's ABH 2 power amp which is supposedly one of the most transparent power amps around in its price range and a fair bit above it too if rumours are to be trusted. I can only speak for the pre amp headphone amp personally. I have yet to audition their power amps.
As far as the current SOTA combo DAVE /BLU2 goes I would rather buy a decent little summer cottage or even a villa in some areas of  Sweden or a condo in Thailand or somewhere else in Asia for that kind of money!
Cheers Christer


----------



## buzzlulu (Apr 2, 2018)

Christer said:


> I don't think there is anything special needed apart from simply connecting the Qutest via its full size galvanically isolated USB 2 port going out from Qutest into a MBP.
> Anyway, that is what I have been doing for almost a month now since buying my Qutest here in Singapore.
> I use no jitterbugs or other questionable  extra "cleansers" or re-clockers .
> At his seminar at Can Jam in Singapore last week, Rob very much questioned the need for such things with his dacs..



Since ROON has now enabled iOS devices to act as ROON endpoints can one connect an iPad or iPhone directly to the Qutest (obviously using the Apple CCK connector kit and USB cable) and still achieve perfect sound without resorting to "cleansers or re-clockers" as mentioned above - and specifically by Rob ?

Has anyone played around with this yet? Any feedback?


----------



## Hummer25

Hi Christer,

I will be used with an upgraded fully valve regulated Croft 25R preamp which is extremely revealing and transparent. This is partnered with a Croft 7 OTL power amp. I understand the output of the Qutest can be changed to suit the gain of my preamp so this will be interesting.

Most of the time I have spent with Chord equipment has been listening via a Chord  SPM 1200 Mk2 power amp into various high end speakers. Interestingly we have done quite a bit of evaluation regarding Hi Rez digital formats including DSD and much of the time ripped well masted 16bit sounds superb. I have not been overly impressed with DSD material but have noticed some improvement on a few 24bit recordings.

What I have noticed, and I have written about this on the Chord DAVE Thread, is not only the detail retrieval but the smoothness that comes across with Dave and Blu2. Each upgrade of the Chord DACs brings digital closer to the very best analogue sound I have heard. However as digital can do so many things better than analogue we are entering new territory in sound reproduction. I once heard one of the top mastering engineers talking about digital music and he mentioned that digital recording was absolutely the best way to record music but getting that recording through mastering and then through the digital chain we have currently can often result in a very poor listening experience.

It has been mentioned many times that as we learn more about the problems with digital music and how to resolve them we get closer to a fabulous home audio experience and I believe Chord DACs are some of the best devices that has moved the whole digital music business on leaps and bounds, taking  digital recordings and extracting/ resolving them in a way that becomes a very pleasurable experience.


----------



## mentt

buzzlulu said:


> Since ROON has now enabled iOS devices to act as ROON endpoints can one connect an iPad or iPhone directly to the Qutest (obviously using the Apple CCK connector kit and USB cable) and still achieve perfect sound without resorting to "cleansers or re-clockers" as mentioned above - and specifically by Rob ?
> 
> Has anyone played around with this yet? Any feedback?



Yes, Qutest is working fine with iOS. I was using it with iPhone 6s as Roon end point. It sounds much better than PC or MAC, but raspberry pi 3 + allo digi one or alLo USB bridge sounds noticible better


----------



## stevedlu

buzzlulu said:


> Since ROON has now enabled iOS devices to act as ROON endpoints can one connect an iPad or iPhone directly to the Qutest (obviously using the Apple CCK connector kit and USB cable) and still achieve perfect sound without resorting to "cleansers or re-clockers" as mentioned above - and specifically by Rob ?
> 
> Has anyone played around with this yet? Any feedback?



I'm still waiting for my Qutest from Moon-Audio... However I have tested my iPad Pro as a Roon Endpoint with the MOJO and found it a significant DOWNGRADE in sonic performance. It immediately sounded dull like I was using a totally inferior DAC, much worse than direct usb from my iMac. I ultimately perfer Toslink over USB. I find the high frequency range is more controlled, detailed and less sibilant using this method. I have a hunch that the endless amount of USB decrapifying methods can be avoided using the above average SPDIF processing that CHORD DACs have.


----------



## andromeda1954

buzzlulu said:


> Since ROON has now enabled iOS devices to act as ROON endpoints can one connect an iPad or iPhone directly to the Qutest (obviously using the Apple CCK connector kit and USB cable) and still achieve perfect sound without resorting to "cleansers or re-clockers" as mentioned above - and specifically by Rob ?
> 
> Has anyone played around with this yet? Any feedback?


I tried my iPhone X (KaiserTone player ) to act as Roon endpoint connected to the Qutest via Audio Quest Diamond USB cable and Ifi Audio Micro IUSB 3.0 . It sounded great even better than my Mac .


----------



## buzzlulu

Thank you for all the answers re using iOS devices as endpoints.

Now - has anyone compared an iOS device as a ROON vs. something like a MicroRendu or UltraRendu?


----------



## Hummer25

Christer said:


> I don't think there is anything special needed apart from simply connecting the Qutest via its full size galvanically isolated USB 2 port going out from Qutest into a MBP.
> 
> Anyway, that is what I have been doing for almost a month now since buying my Qutest here in Singapore.
> 
> ...




Hi Christer, do you use the internal Macbook Drive or do you use an offboard drive for your music. I was thinking of using another Drive loaded with music attached to the MBP via a second USB socket and then using the other USB out to Qutest. 

Is this set up likely to result in  poorer SQ rather than using just the internal MBP drive.


----------



## FangJoker (Apr 4, 2018)

What would be a good headphone amp option for no more than $1,000 usd be to pair with the quetest? I may sell my hugo 2 to a friend who would use it at work and at home.

I would only use it at home so I don't need to take it outside the house with me and I'd like a more powerful amp. But I also might regret a future poly type device as I want to build a music server, but I could also build one with a synergy nas. That route might still be much more robust for home use than an add on music streamer for the hugo 2 plus I could also use it to stream movies.


----------



## AlexB73

I have 2Qute for one year. I like its sound. But I'm thinking about upgrade to Qutest.
Does anyone compare the sound of 2Qute vs Qutest?
Is it big difference in sound? 
What is exactly different?
Does Qutest have the same tonal balance?
Does Qutest sound more dynamic?
Does Qutest have more instrument separation?
Does Qutest have bigger soundscape?
Is any difference in PRaT (Pace, Rhythm And Timing) and general musicality?

Regards,
Alex.


----------



## Christer (Apr 4, 2018)

Hummer25 said:


> Hi Christer, do you use the internal Macbook Drive or do you use an offboard drive for your music. I was thinking of using another Drive loaded with music attached to the MBP via a second USB socket and then using the other USB out to Qutest.
> 
> Is this set up likely to result in  poorer SQ rather than using just the internal MBP drive.



Hello  Hummer25, I am not sure I understand your question correctly but,I keep  most of my music on portable Firewire  800 harddrives. From there the  music files either aiff or dff go into ram and  are played from memory either via  Pure Music Player or Audirvana Plus.
I keep  most my music on separate hardrives mainly to save space.
My internal  580 gigabyte SSD harddrive  quickly  fills up with  rawfiles ,tiffs and jpgs  from my camera.
And I have around 400 gigabyte of music on two portable  La Cie rugged drives.
I had  some other harddrives  earlier but dropped one on a hard floor once and it died! Since then I only use the rugged drives from La Cie.
I occasionally drop those to,but they survive!
And I have lost count of how many times the magsafe connection on my MBPs have saved those two.
I only have  around 30 gigabyte of hi res files on my  internal harddrive and I can't  hear any difference between those and the others via any of my dacs.
Cheers Christer


----------



## Hummer25

Christer said:


> Hello  Hummer25, I am not sure I understand your question correctly but,I keep  most of my music on portable Firewire  800 harddrives. From there the  music files either aiff or dff go into ram and  are played from memory either via  Pure Music Player or Audirvana Plus.
> I keep  most my music on separate hardrives mainly to save space.
> My internal  580 gigabyte SSD harddrive  quickly  fills up with  rawfiles ,tiffs and jpgs  from my camera.
> And I have around 400 gigabyte of music on two portable  La Cie rugged drives.
> ...



Hi Christer,

Your answer to my question is perfect. You have given me exactly the information I was looking for. I am intending to use my MBP with portable SSD harddrives in  the same way you have described.


----------



## AlexB73

Hi Christer,

Do you like Qutest for simphonic music reproduction?
Do you see any problem in dynamic?
I also like classical music historical records from 78 RPM era.
I like Pearl and Opus Kura remastering without massive noise cleaning (that kills dynamic and makes music died).
Do you listen classical music historical records on Qutest?

Regards,
Alex.


----------



## soares

Strange. What makes me frustrated is that the SQ of files from Tidal is better that the ones played from my external hard disk. Did not try yet to play them from my internal disk. I am using a sonic transporter i5, ultrarendu and a 2qute or Oppo 205. The first 3 with LPS 's.


----------



## dawktah2

Does anyone know what is going on with US delivery, this is getting a bit ridiculous!!!


----------



## stevedlu

dawktah2 said:


> Does anyone know what is going on with US delivery, this is getting a bit ridiculous!!!


I inquired Drew from Moon-Audio and he sent me this response today.

'We are still trying to get Chord and the US distributor to lock down a date for us. We have not been able to get one. The delay was the result of the metal work vendor that does the chassis. Chord is working 24/7 to get huge production runs out the door once the chassis come in. But they don't have a crystal ball on when the vendor will have the metal work complete for them yet. I'm hopeful it is this month."

SO HOPEFULLY SOON!


----------



## dawktah2

stevedlu said:


> I inquired Drew from Moon-Audio and he sent me this response today.
> 
> 'We are still trying to get Chord and the US distributor to lock down a date for us. We have not been able to get one. The delay was the result of the metal work vendor that does the chassis. Chord is working 24/7 to get huge production runs out the door once the chassis come in. But they don't have a crystal ball on when the vendor will have the metal work complete for them yet. I'm hopeful it is this month."
> 
> SO HOPEFULLY SOON!



These thing have been flying to people all over the globe this sounds like a lie!


----------



## stevedlu

dawktah2 said:


> These thing have been flying to people all over the globe this sounds like a lie!


¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## azabu (Apr 5, 2018)

Just did a side by side comparison with my Sony TA-ZH1ES and Chord Qutest from MacBook Pro with Roon -> Regen -> DAC -> BHSE.

It's just no competition. The Sony is a wonderful, warm sounding amp/dac; but it's clearly a good step or so below the Chord Qutest in terms of performance. Not saying the Sony isn't enjoyable, just the Qutest is so natural and resolving. Now, I wonder how it will improve with an UltraRendu and dedicated power supplies.

I'm 110% satisfied.


----------



## Christer (Apr 5, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> Hi Christer,
> 
> Do you like Qutest for simphonic music reproduction?
> Do you see any problem in dynamic?
> ...


Hello Alex,
I listen almost exclusively to symphonic music and Opera. Using my Qutest so far only with my HEKV2 and HD800 via a Benchmark headphone amp I have not experienced any obvious  problems with dynamics.If anything the HD 800 is the limiting factor being more veiled in the bass particularly than the very clear and open HEKV 2. On the contrary,the noise floor seems very low and mostly inaudible giving large dynamic range recordings both very clear resolved SQ at both ends of a large  dynamic spectrum as one would only basically hear with large scale symphonic and operatic music.
I haven't compared HUGO 2 side by side with Qutest so far but my memories of the quite a few times I have auditioned H2 is that Qutest with both my and some other bigger headphone amps I have tried with Qutest sounds fuller and warmer and a bit more realistic all in all, than HUGO 2 on its own with headphones like the HEKV2.
Apart from mainly hi res master files I also listen now and then to historic recordings mainly via Youtube ie Bruno Walter, Furtwängler and others in  classical works  from the 78s era. And Qutest makes some of them sound surprisingly listenable for their age and mono and all.
Where Qutest really shines compared to HUGO 1 which I also have with me on my travels this winter is both with really  well recorded modern hi res recordings and most of  of the analogue gems from the 60s and 70s from both DECCA and surprisingly DGG in my collection.
Karajan's mid 60s recording of Wagner's Das Rheingold  for example sounds almost like a very good modern recording for long stretches and was arguably better more realistically balanced than the DECCA  recording from  a few years earlier with Solti via Qutest.
Decca  sometimes balanced  to impress more on  good but ,not quite SOTA systems of the day, and Qutest is able to reveal such things quite well, though not as well as DAVE or DAVE/BLU2 which are even better imo.
Via HUGO both that one and Decca's classic Turandot for example sounded thin and wiry via HUGO  in comparison. The more complex and dynamically demanding  the music and recordings are,the bigger the difference between my HUGO and Qutest imo.
I hope the above gives you at least some idea of its strengths imho.

Cheers Christer


----------



## AlexB73

Hi Christer,

Thank you for your detailed reply.

Dave is out of my range. So I will save money for Qutest.

I listen vintage Altec 604 speakers with DIY 300B SET amplifier.
I also listen LPs on my EMT948 turntable.
I know, a few people on this forum have vintage speakers and equipment.
Old Altec speakers are exceptional for jazz and vocals. They are not bad for classical music, but not as good as for jazz.

Regards,
Alex


----------



## FangJoker

I hate asking again, but any recommendations for a headphone amp priced $1,000 and under to pair with the qutest?


----------



## thiepval68

vegasf1 said:


> I hate asking again, but any recommendations for a headphone amp priced $1,000 and under to pair with the qutest?


If you are using HD800 the v200 headphone amp sounds excellent.


----------



## jarnopp

vegasf1 said:


> I hate asking again, but any recommendations for a headphone amp priced $1,000 and under to pair with the qutest?



If you are listening to headphones as one of your main use cases, why wouldn't you go for Hugo2 over Qutest?  Even as desktop only, and the option of a streamer coming also (2Go).


----------



## zek4u (Apr 5, 2018)

Wouldn’t something like the V200 and a Qutest be superior to the Hugo2’s headphone out?  More macro dynamic and authority. I had a 2qute with a V280 and V281 and it was a wonderful combo. Now I’m thinking or pairing the Qutest with my Sennheiser HDV 820. In Dave Hanson’s review, he said the HDV 820 and the Hugo2 would be a great combo. Would expect the same out of the Qutest and it will sit a lot nicer on the desktop. 

The 2Go could be a reason to go with the Hugo2 if it’s better then my microRendu plus i wouldn’t need an expensive USB cable. I wonder if the gapless issues have been worked out. Would be using jRiver over DLNA. Would also have the portability advantage with the  Hugo2, 2Go, HD800S and iPhone when I want to take the office on the road. Might be times I want a bump in quality over my AQ Red.


----------



## dawktah2

zek4u said:


> Wouldn’t something like the V200 and a Qutest be superior to the Hugo2’s headphone out?  More macro dynamic and authority. I had a 2qute with a V280 and V281 and it was a wonderful combo. Now I’m thinking or pairing the Qutest with my Sennheiser HDV 820. In Dave Hanson’s review, he said the HDV 820 and the Hugo2 would be a great combo. Would expect the same out of the Qutest and it will sit a lot nicer on the desktop.



I'm one that agrees with this. I'm sure a full size amp will be better than a transportable one.


----------



## jarnopp

dawktah2 said:


> I'm one that agrees with this. I'm sure a full size amp will be better than a transportable one.



Not necessarily, according to the Qutest (and Hugo 2) designer:
https://www.head-fi.org/posts/14008432/


----------



## stevedlu

zek4u said:


> Wouldn’t something like the V200 and a Qutest be superior to the Hugo2’s headphone out?  More macro dynamic and authority. I had a 2qute with a V280 and V281 and it was a wonderful combo. Now I’m thinking or pairing the Qutest with my Sennheiser HDV 820. In Dave Hanson’s review, he said the HDV 820 and the Hugo2 would be a great combo. Would expect the same out of the Qutest and it will sit a lot nicer on the desktop.
> 
> The 2Go could be a reason to go with the Hugo2 if it’s better then my microRendu plus i wouldn’t need an expensive USB cable. I wonder if the gapless issues have been worked out. Would be using jRiver over DLNA. Would also have the portability advantage with the  Hugo2, 2Go, HD800S and iPhone when I want to take the office on the road. Might be times I want a bump in quality over my AQ Red.



I cringed when I read V200. A Chord DAC, optimally, should be paired with a transparent/resolving AMP to retain the sonic qualities, which the V200 is very very far from.


----------



## zek4u (Apr 5, 2018)

So we are talking V281, V280, Luxman P1-U/-750U, HVD 820, EAR HP4, HPA-1. Pick your poison. All about synergy, cables and the needs of your headphones.

Or you can always pick a pair of headphones that match well with the Hugo2 and avoid the expense... but where is the fun in that solution. We all have unlimited funds in this hobby.

Other reason I'm leaning towards a Qutest is I want to listen to vinyl over headphones. I don't want to digitize my analog into a Hugo2.


----------



## stevedlu

My Questyle 600i makes my Mojo sound like a $2-3K DAC. Seems like a no brainer that the Qutest will be off the charts amazing with it. If ever freaking arrived to the US!


----------



## thiepval68

zek4u said:


> Wouldn’t something like the V200 and a Qutest be superior to the Hugo2’s headphone out?  More macro dynamic and authority. I had a 2qute with a V280 and V281 and it was a wonderful combo. Now I’m thinking or pairing the Qutest with my Sennheiser HDV 820. In Dave Hanson’s review, he said the HDV 820 and the Hugo2 would be a great combo. Would expect the same out of the Qutest and it will sit a lot nicer on the desktop.
> 
> The 2Go could be a reason to go with the Hugo2 if it’s better then my microRendu plus i wouldn’t need an expensive USB cable. I wonder if the gapless issues have been worked out. Would be using jRiver over DLNA. Would also have the portability advantage with the  Hugo2, 2Go, HD800S and iPhone when I want to take the office on the road. Might be times I want a bump in quality over my AQ Red.





zek4u said:


> So we are talking V281, V280, Luxman P1-U/-750U, HVD 820, EAR HP4, HPA-1. Pick you poison. All about synergy, cables and the needs of your headphones.
> 
> Or you can always pick a pair of headphones that match well with the Hugo2 and avoid the expense... but where is the fun in that solution. We all have unlimited fund in this hobby.
> 
> Other reason I'm leaning towards a Qutest is I want to listen to vinyl over headphones. I don't want to digitize my analog into a Hugo2.





jarnopp said:


> If you are listening to headphones as one of your main use cases, why wouldn't you go for Hugo2 over Qutest?  Even as desktop only, and the option of a streamer coming also (2Go).





jarnopp said:


> If you are listening to headphones as one of your main use cases, why wouldn't you go for Hugo2 over Qutest?  Even as desktop only, and the option of a streamer coming also (2Go).





jarnopp said:


> If you are listening to headphones as one of your main use cases, why wouldn't you go for Hugo2 over Qutest?  Even as desktop only, and the option of a streamer coming also (2Go).


----------



## zek4u

Depends on your needs. Portability, vinyl over headphones, not having everything in one box, possible increase in performance for needy headphones, added expense and complexity vs simplicity. Hugo2 seems like the winner if you can deal with the small USB port, limited cable choices and/or adapter, heat when charging, additional cost, cable rats nest on the desktop.


----------



## thiepval68

A while back, Hugo came alive when using V200 to drive HD800
Hugo alone was OK with iem (K10)
Qutest a huge improvement over Hugo and still using v200 to drive HD800 (several references for the good v200 HD800 match)
Qutest into good passive preamp (avoiding digital volume control)  for speaker route ......NOW WE ARE LISTENING TO  SOMETHING VERY SPECIAL..


----------



## stevedlu

Although the combo seems almost blasphemous to me, I have heard that the V200 "tames" the HD800 well. VEGASF1 if you are interested in the V200 I will sell you mine for a very good price. PM me.


----------



## zek4u (Apr 5, 2018)

I've been very impressed with the Sennheiser HDV 820's analog circuitry. Read that it has been improved. Well I'm running an LTA ZOTL 10 amplifier off of a headphone jack!  Sounds completely amazing with my Harbeth P3ESRs. Waiting for my XLR cables to arrive. Best of all worlds HD800S and P3s. I'm tempted to try a Benchmark DAC3 HGC but just have a feeling the Qutest with my HDV 820 or maybe a Pass Labs HPA-1 would be the ticket. I like amps such as the V281 and HDV 820 that run my HD800S headphones balanced over my Cardas cable. I know John Grandberg was using a Jeff Rowland Capri preamp in a Hugo review and he noticed a "subtle shift in tonal balance, where the presentation was simultaneously fuller and a bit darker up top." Would want something small for the desk where you wouldn't hear the difference between Qutest > headphone amp vs. Qutest> pre (pre-out) > headphone amp.

FYI. Thought the V280 sounded just the slightest more laid back then the V281. If my memory serves me right, HDV 820 sounds more transparent, has greater resolution with just as much macro dynamics as the V281. Nothing etched and wonderful transients. I can't wait to try a Qutest with my  HDV 820. Dave Hanson, you better be right. lol


----------



## DaaDaa

zek4u said:


> I've been very impressed with the Sennheiser HDV 820's analog circuitry. Read that it has been improved. Well I'm running an LTA ZOTL 10 amplifier off of a headphone jack!  Sounds completely amazing with my Harbeth P3ESRs. Waiting for my XLR cables to arrive. Best of all worlds HD800S and P3s. I'm tempted to try a Benchmark DAC3 HGC but just have a feeling the Qutest with my HDV 820 or maybe a Pass Labs HPA-1 would be the ticket. I like amps such as the V281 and HDV 820 that run my HD800S headphones balanced over my Cardas cable. I know John Grandberg was using a Jeff Rowland Capri preamp in a Hugo review and he noticed a "subtle shift in tonal balance, where the presentation was simultaneously fuller and a bit darker up top." Would want something small for the desk where you wouldn't hear the difference between Qutest > headphone amp vs. Qutest> pre (pre-out) > headphone amp.
> 
> FYI. Thought the V280 sounded just the slightest more laid back then the V281. If my memory serves me right, HDV 820 sounds more transparent, has greater resolution with just as much macro dynamics as the V281. Nothing etched and wonderful transients. I can't wait to try a Qutest with my  HDV 820. Dave Hanson, you better be right. lol


I HAVENT heard the cutest but the benchmark dac is can confirm that it is too hyped and it really does not sound that great. qutest would be my first choice to try.


----------



## Joe-Siow

vegasf1 said:


> I hate asking again, but any recommendations for a headphone amp priced $1,000 and under to pair with the qutest?



Not sure about the rest, but I am enjoying mine tremendously with the Linear Tube MZ-2. Great details and transparency married with glorious organic mids.


----------



## Eddie O

I recently bought a Chord Qutest and can't really enjoy it because it sounds extremly bright and harsh. Has anyone noticed the same problem?


----------



## dmance

Eddie O said:


> I recently bought a Chord Qutest and can't really enjoy it because it sounds extremly bright and harsh. Has anyone noticed the same problem?


My review Hugo2 came to me after about two months on the road and it sounded so bright and harsh that I almost returned it.  But after a few days it just transformed..and sounded as I expected.  I have no idea if that's your problem ...but there must be a component in yours that just needs more time to align itself.


----------



## Eddie O

My unit has got prox. 70 hours of playing time. My 804D3 are bright speakers. Gregory Porter en Leonard Cohen are enjoyable, but high notes on a piano or violin are really hurting my ears.


----------



## dmance

Eddie O said:


> My unit has got prox. 70 hours of playing time. My 804D3 are bright speakers. Gregory Porter en Leonard Cohen are enjoyable, but high notes on a piano or violin are really hurting my ears.


Try TOSLINK to see if its something to do with RF on USB.  Good luck.


----------



## Eddie O

dmance said:


> Try TOSLINK to see if its something to do with RF on USB.  Good luck.


Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried optical with my Marantz cdplayer as a transport, it had the same harsh sound as the USB-connection.


----------



## jarnopp

Eddie O said:


> Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried optical with my Marantz cdplayer as a transport, it had the same harsh sound as the USB-connection.



Optical is a good suggestion. You might try different output settings, also. It has 1v, 2v, and 3v. Your amp may not like the higher voltages.


----------



## zek4u

Too much silver in your cables or a bad cable?  i.e. interconnect/speaker cable. Do other sources sound fine?



Eddie O said:


> Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried optical with my Marantz cdplayer as a transport, it had the same harsh sound as the USB-connection.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Eddie O said:


> My unit has got prox. 70 hours of playing time. My 804D3 are bright speakers. Gregory Porter en Leonard Cohen are enjoyable, but high notes on a piano or violin are really hurting my ears.



Matching is very important. Being an owner of a Qutest myself, I wouldn't say it is bright sounding. It has very good transparency and details though.

What amp do you have in the chain? The 804D3 is also very transparent and focuses more on details as well, so perhaps copper cabling would be more suitable in the system.


----------



## Eddie O

Thanks for the advice. My main system: desktop running Foobar with Fidelizer, Qutest, 2 x Marantz pm14s1SE bi-amp, Van de Hull Snowline (copper with silver), B&W 804D3, dedicated listening room with Akotherm absorption. I’ve tried all output levels on the Qutest. After some more burn-in time I’m planning on changing the cables, the Snowline do probably emphasize the higher notes. My Audiolab qdac sounds fine in this set up.


----------



## dac64 (Apr 7, 2018)

Eddie O said:


> Thanks for the advice. My main system: desktop running Foobar with Fidelizer, Qutest, 2 x Marantz pm14s1SE bi-amp, Van de Hull Snowline (copper with silver), B&W 804D3, dedicated listening room with Akotherm absorption. I’ve tried all output levels on the Qutest. After some more burn-in time I’m planning on changing the cables, the Snowline do probably emphasize the higher notes. My Audiolab qdac sounds fine in this set up.



Audiolab products are warm sounding. If you have a pre-amp, I'd play CD from any CD player/transport to the qutest to verify. Another thing I'd try it to toe-out the speakers, and move the speakers front or back to enhance the low, better low, better body and better high!

And hear-say, silver-plated copper sounds brighter than pure silver.

have you try optical? or notebook with battery to qutest?


----------



## Hummer25 (Apr 7, 2018)

Joe-Siow said:


> Matching is very important. Being an owner of a Qutest myself, I wouldn't say it is bright sounding. It has very good transparency and details though.
> 
> What amp do you have in the chain? The 804D3 is also very transparent and focuses more on details as well, so perhaps copper cabling would be more suitable in the system.



Hi Joe,  I agree and would very much recommend trying copper cable. I had similar issue in my system and was running cables with plenty of silver in them. I switched to copper and the sound was much more balanced and the edgy top end brightness disappeared.


----------



## Currawong

Silver shouldn't do that. I guess there must be plenty of cables made with silver that deliberately make the music sound that way to seem like they are adding detail. If you get something like Moon Audio's Silver Dragon there is none of that.

Though it's with the Hugo 2, I've been testing the Soundaware P1 with very good results, enough so that if I was in the market for it I'd consider it with the Qutest as my desktop system.


----------



## bmfmarius

@Eddie O, nice system  you have there! But i  couldn't notice that it's lacking, from my point of view, an important piece of the transport chain. 
That desktop computer is not suitable for the rest of the system. The sibilance at/of the high notes is due to the jittery nature of your desktop computer.
Get a sotm 200/ 200 ultra streamer, connect the qutest to the dedicated USB port and you are set..
I have a much cheaper system and I've started with the desktop PC, then rpi3 with linnear power supply, sotm 100 and now sotm200. 
Connected to the sotm is the Hydra-Z USB bridge > coax to Mojo
VERY IMPORTANT, the streamer and the bridge are being powered from an diy PSU with L200c voltage regulator and 22k mundorf cap, Elna caps, AND a 12V 9Ah Maxwell ups battery!
Without the battery, the magic disappers.
The rest of the system elex-r amp> QA 3050 speakers!


----------



## Romi54

Is there a tonal difference regarding the power settings (1V, 2V or 3V)? Or does this only have to do with the volume?

Many Thanks!


----------



## plsvn

Romi54 said:


> Or does this only have to do with the volume?



on my tubes pre it doesn't even affect volume in the slightest
YMMV


----------



## Eddie O

bmfmarius said:


> @Eddie O, nice system  you have there! But i  couldn't notice that it's lacking, from my point of view, an important piece of the transport chain.
> That desktop computer is not suitable for the rest of the system. The sibilance at/of the high notes is due to the jittery nature of your desktop computer.
> Get a sotm 200/ 200 ultra streamer, connect the qutest to the dedicated USB port and you are set..
> I have a much cheaper system and I've started with the desktop PC, then rpi3 with linnear power supply, sotm 100 and now sotm200.
> ...



Thanks for your advice. The Sotm is definitely on my shortlist.  I’m upgrading in steps (more fun). A dedicated desktop or streamer would be the next step. Power and cable at the finish. I was just kind of disappointed because the Qutest sounds not even nearly as good as the cheaper and older Audiolab. Has the 200 ultra an advantage over the 200 on the Qutest?


----------



## bmfmarius (Apr 7, 2018)

> Has the 200 ultra an advantage over the 200 on the Qutest?


Well it does come with their (best?!) Reclocker vs the standard 200.
The ultra was to expensive for me and I already own the hydra-z witch is doing the reclocking and has galvanically isolated usb
So for your system the ultra would be great.


----------



## Eddie O

bmfmarius said:


> Well it does come with their (best?!) Reclocker vs the standard 200.
> The ultra was to expensive for me and I already own the hydra-z witch is doing the reclocking and has galvanically isolated usb
> So for your system the ultra would be great.



The Qutest reclocks and has galvanic islolation on the usb also. Perhaps the 200 ultra is overkill?


----------



## bmfmarius

Maybe, maybe not


----------



## zek4u (Apr 8, 2018)

I’ve had great luck with my microrendu running off a Teddy 9V PSU. I plan on using it with a Qutest. Was using an MCRU with my 2Qute and was thinking of another one with the Qutest.  I’m a big believer in garbage in, garbage out. My CAPs carbon runs off a good Teddy 12V and the microrendu I believe further eliminates jitter, RFI, RMI. I think Chord’s work to eliminate problems make me feel secure. Start with dirty motherboard noise going across your USB, your going to have problems. Do think Mac’s are a little better then PCs but further isolation using these bridges is the way to go. Microrendu, ultrarendu, SOTM 200, etc.

Oh, almost forgot, my Time Warner router/modem absolutely killed my sound! Moving to a good $400 Linksys router fixed the issue. Blue Jean ethernet cables are cheap.


----------



## flacre

Eddie O said:


> I recently bought a Chord Qutest and can't really enjoy it because it sounds extremly bright and harsh. Has anyone noticed the same problem?



It may be that it just needs more break-in time.  Even What HiFi noted: "It takes quite a few hours of operation for the Qutest to lose its out-of-the-box midrange hardness." whathifi.com/chord/qutest/review#PsIImsl8rWhZF9cd.99.

Mine sounded great out of the box but then turned quite rude for a while.  I've got about 150 hours on it now and it sounds great again.
If you want to speed the running process you could consider running a "break -in" disc like this one: https://telluriumq.com/system-disc/.

Don't give up on the Qutest.  It's a fantastic DAC.


----------



## jayz (Apr 7, 2018)

Eddie O said:


> Thanks for the advice. My main system: desktop running Foobar with Fidelizer, Qutest, 2 x Marantz pm14s1SE bi-amp, Van de Hull Snowline (copper with silver), B&W 804D3, dedicated listening room with Akotherm absorption. I’ve tried all output levels on the Qutest. After some more burn-in time I’m planning on changing the cables, the Snowline do probably emphasize the higher notes. My Audiolab qdac sounds fine in this set up.



In my experience, B&W speakers are on the clinical side and can easily get bright and edgy with incorrect component matching. As others have pointed out, it is likely that the Audiolab may have balanced things out. I once had a pair of 802D  (v1) and simply could not get it to work in my room so had to sell it on. If it gets to the point you have tried all options without luck, I would suggest you try another pair of speakers - similar calibre, different brand. Maybe try borrow from a friend just to try in your room and setup.


----------



## Eddie O

flacre said:


> It may be that it just needs more break-in time.  Even What HiFi noted: "It takes quite a few hours of operation for the Qutest to lose its out-of-the-box midrange hardness." whathifi.com/chord/qutest/review#PsIImsl8rWhZF9cd.99.
> 
> Mine sounded great out of the box but then turned quite rude for a while.  I've got about 150 hours on it now and it sounds great again.
> If you want to speed the running process you could consider running a "break -in" disc like this one: https://telluriumq.com/system-disc/.
> ...



My Qutest is playing around the clock........ waiting for the miracle to happen


----------



## Eddie O

jayz said:


> In my experience, B&W speakers are on the clinical side and can easily get bright and edgy. As others have pointed out, it is likely that the Audiolab may have balanced things out. I once had a 802D  (v1) and simply could not get it to work in my room so had to sell it on. If it gets to the point you have tried all options without luck, I would suggest you try another pair of speakers - similar calibre, different brand. Maybe try borrow from a friend just to try in your room and setup.[/QU
> 
> The 804D3 are definitly bright, but really great speakers. Combined with the Audiolab they really sing. I have a second set with XT8 speakers and a nice set of  Canton speakers, after the burn-in  I will change the set.


----------



## AlexB73

Does Qutest have the similar tonal ballans as 2Qute has?


----------



## Currawong

Romi54 said:


> Is there a tonal difference regarding the power settings (1V, 2V or 3V)? Or does this only have to do with the volume?
> 
> Many Thanks!



It has to do with the volume and our perception of sound. I recommend doing a web search for “equal loudness contours” which will explain it.


----------



## jarnopp

Currawong said:


> It has to do with the volume and our perception of sound. I recommend doing a web search for “equal loudness contours” which will explain it.



Isn’t the output setting there to help match to your amplifier’s (or preamp) input sensitivity, more than anything else?


----------



## Currawong

jarnopp said:


> Isn’t the output setting there to help match to your amplifier’s (or preamp) input sensitivity, more than anything else?



Yes. For most amps, which have the volume control on the input, it will just affect the usable volume range. For some though, like Audio-gd, the volume is on the output of the first gain stage, so if you overload the inputs you'll get distortion. 2V is standard.


----------



## jarnopp

Currawong said:


> Yes. For most amps, which have the volume control on the input, it will just affect the usable volume range. For some though, like Audio-gd, the volume is on the output of the first gain stage, so if you overload the inputs you'll get distortion. 2V is standard.



Ok, you’re talking about HP amps. Most speaker amps do not have a volume control. For volume control, you can use digital (like in Roon or other player software) or an active or passive preamp.


----------



## baiyy1986

Ok, I know hugo2 use USB charging port because of its portable use, but why Qutest also use USB instead of wall charger?
Any benefits?


----------



## elviscaprice

baiyy1986 said:


> Ok, I know hugo2 use USB charging port because of its portable use, but why Qutest also use USB instead of wall charger?
> Any benefits?


My guess would be that Chord figured users wouldn't accidentally plug in an incorrect voltage charger and fry the unit.  With a USB micro input, without some DIY, most folks are going to conform to the 5V standard.


----------



## AlexB73 (Apr 9, 2018)

jarnopp said:


> Ok, you’re talking about HP amps. Most speaker amps do not have a volume control. For volume control, you can use digital (like in Roon or other player software) or an active or passive preamp.


Passive preamps work exactly like input volume controls. In this case 3v output will work best.
1st because lower output impedance of passive preamp. For passive preamp it is important, because, long wires between it and a first stage of amplification. For a volume control on an input of integrated amplifier it is less important, because short wires between it and a first stage of amplification.
2nd because lover signal to noise ratio.

For software volume control 1v output will work best. Most of power amplifiers have 1 to 2 volts input sensitivity (Max voltage before clipping).


----------



## Joe-Siow

jarnopp said:


> Ok, you’re talking about HP amps. *Most speaker amps do not have a volume control. *For volume control, you can use digital (like in Roon or other player software) or an active or passive preamp.



That's only for power amps. I cannot imagine an integrated amp without volume control.


----------



## Romi54

With 1V, the stage is not that far in front and the sound is not in your face anymore. I think now better .....


----------



## Vokhos

Hello.I want to buy this DAC to use it with Cambridge CXA 60 and Dynaudio M 20 speakers.My simple question is :do i need a preamplifier or i can connect the DAC directly to  Cambridge CXA 60 ?Thx


----------



## jarnopp

Vokhos said:


> Hello.I want to buy this DAC to use it with Cambridge CXA 60 and Dynaudio M 20 speakers.My simple question is :do i need a preamplifier or i can connect the DAC directly to  Cambridge CXA 60 ?Thx



It’s an integrated amp with its own volume control, so you should be fine. It also already has a DAC but I assume you are looking for a better DAC than what is built in.


----------



## Thenewguy007

bmfmarius said:


> @Eddie O, nice system  you have there! But i  couldn't notice that it's lacking, from my point of view, an important piece of the transport chain.
> That desktop computer is not suitable for the rest of the system. The sibilance at/of the high notes is due to the jittery nature of your desktop computer.
> Get a sotm 200/ 200 ultra streamer, connect the qutest to the dedicated USB port and you are set..
> I have a much cheaper system and I've started with the desktop PC, then rpi3 with linnear power supply, sotm 100 and now sotm200.
> ...



How does the DIY PSU look like? Big? No wires besides the DC cables?


----------



## bmfmarius (Apr 9, 2018)

@Thenewguy007


> How does the DIY PSU look like? Big? No wires besides the DC cables?


Small actually, 10 cm x 5 x 5
I'm currently searching a metal case for better aspect and maybe some shielding


----------



## Hummer25

You don't need a preamplifier as you Cambridge CXA 60 is an integrated amp so you can just connect DAC to one of the line inputs.


----------



## elviscaprice

nevermind


----------



## Eddie O

Vokhos said:


> Hello.I want to buy this DAC to use it with Cambridge CXA 60 and Dynaudio M 20 speakers.My simple question is :do i need a preamplifier or i can connect the DAC directly to  Cambridge CXA 60 ?Thx



You don't need a preamplifier because your Cambridge is a integrated amp (pre and poweramp).


----------



## Vokhos

Thank you all for your answers.I bought today the Qutest and all is good.The volume knob of the Cambridge is set to minimum.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Vokhos said:


> Thank you all for your answers.I bought today the Qutest and all is good.The volume knob of the Cambridge is set to minimum.



Try setting the volume at your source (laptop, computer, app, etc) to maximum, then toggle the volume using the volume knob of your Cambridge. I suspect that should work best


----------



## jarnopp

Joe-Siow said:


> Try setting the volume at your source (laptop, computer, app, etc) to maximum, then toggle the volume using the volume knob of your Cambridge. I suspect that should work best



Also, set the Qutest to the output (1, 2, or 3V) that allows the Cambridge value lime control to be about center of the range when at your usual listening level.


----------



## jayz

bmfmarius said:


> @Thenewguy007
> 
> Small actually, 10 cm x 5 x 5
> I'm currently searching a metal case for better aspect and maybe some shielding



Will you actually connect up a scope at least to measure whether this is better than stock supply? If you are into DIY electronics I would think it should not be too difficult to source a basic scope, attach the probes while DAC is running, adjust vertical position/offset by 5v, then reduce vertical scale (increase sensitivity) and see how much the supply wiggles. Measuring interference is the next stage.

Audiophiles like to experiment with power supplies I know but I can't understand the logic that says after you purchase probably the best DAC around , the first and foremost improvement to be done is to get a a DIY supply.


----------



## dawktah2

Does anyone now what countries and or regions that received Qutest?  Were there any other places other than North America that didn't get any? Does the power supply shipped have built in plug adapter for different countries?


----------



## dac64

Many info on chord website regarding spec.


----------



## dawktah2 (Apr 11, 2018)

dac64 said:


> Many info on chord website regarding spec.



Is this a response to my question? Are you aware that North America shipment was "delayed," but obviously people around the world have them. I'm just trying to figure out if UL power supply is issue and not aluminum chassis FOR U.S. I made my payment the day moon audio opened it up. I'm still waiting...


----------



## daredevil_kk (Apr 11, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> Is this a response to my question? Are you aware that North America shipment was "delayed," but obviously people around the world have them. I'm just trying to figure out if UL power supply is issue and not aluminum chassis FOR U.S. I made my payment the day moon audio opened it up. I'm still waiting...


The Qutest comes with a universal power supply and all the different plugs( US included). You choose and plug it in.


----------



## plsvn

daredevil_kk said:


> The Qutest comes with a universal power supply and all the different plugs( US included). You choose and plug it in.



... as stated here


----------



## dawktah2 (Apr 11, 2018)

Ok I'm just trying to see why no Qutest were sent to North America!


----------



## JWahl

dawktah2 said:


> Ok I'm just trying to see why no Qutest were sent to North America!



I'm in the same boat.  I've thought about cancelling, but I've been holding out more out of curiosity. I've only heard my Mojo and then the Dave at a meet.  I want to hear for myself the degree to which the Qutest improves upon the Mojo as a DAC.


----------



## miketlse

JWahl said:


> I'm in the same boat.  I've thought about cancelling, but I've been holding out more out of curiosity. I've only heard my Mojo and then the Dave at a meet.  I want to hear for myself the degree to which the Qutest improves upon the Mojo as a DAC.


I suggest holding out. I have read many posts about how much an improvement the Qutest has brought to the music output, and struggle to remember any posts that were critical of the Qutest. If the Qutest is such a big step up, then in a few years you will have forgotten all about this short term shipping delay, and only remember the many hours of music pleasure that you have gained.


----------



## dawktah2

Miketlse, JWahl and others, a little off topic but my recliner arrived today for my listening room, just don't have my Qutest!


----------



## musicman59

Chord is going to be at Axpona this weekend so I am planning on stopping by their room to see if I can get any information about shipping the Qutest to NA.
I am also in the pre-order list.....


----------



## Skampmeister

@Rob Watts hey mate, just a quick question, if I’m listening to something on coax and my iMac is plugged into the usb  and I turn my iMac on, is it normal for the sound to cut out for a second while still on coax?


----------



## sinae

What i truly find sad is that they just decided not to add the volume control because they want to sell their hugo 2.. when in fact it would have cost NOTHING to include it and would save all of us tons of problem.. 

when you have a similar type of dac.. digital volume in the dac is a must.. try to find an ESS sabre dac without volume control and you will have a hard time why? because that volume is totally bitperfect and included in the chip.. doenst cost anything to add it.. 

and in canada.. chord dac are too costly anyway.. we are being backstabbed


----------



## Skampmeister

sinae said:


> What i truly find sad is that they just decided not to add the volume control because they want to sell their hugo 2.. when in fact it would have cost NOTHING to include it and would save all of us tons of problem..
> 
> when you have a similar type of dac.. digital volume in the dac is a must.. try to find an ESS sabre dac without volume control and you will have a hard time why? because that volume is totally bitperfect and included in the chip.. doenst cost anything to add it..
> 
> and in canada.. chord dac are too costly anyway.. we are being backstabbed



I would not have bought a Qutest if it had volume control. Simplicity is the key. Not a product for you by the sounds of things, not a problem with the product.


----------



## dolphy007 (Apr 13, 2018)

The Qutest sounds amazing and I don't mind adjusting the volume the old fashioned way of using the amplifier volume control.

The Qutest doesn't  sound like the product for you. I suggest looking for another DAC that would suit your needs.


----------



## GSP_

Much ado about nothing.


----------



## blueninjasix

sinae said:


> What i truly find sad is that they just decided not to add the volume control because they want to sell their hugo 2.. when in fact it would have cost NOTHING to include it and would save all of us tons of problem..
> 
> when you have a similar type of dac.. digital volume in the dac is a must.. try to find an ESS sabre dac without volume control and you will have a hard time why? because that volume is totally bitperfect and included in the chip.. doenst cost anything to add it..
> 
> and in canada.. chord dac are too costly anyway.. we are being backstabbed


Not sure about being "backstabbed" but I too would prefer to see the volume control included. I'm contemplating upgrading from Mojo which I only use in my home system but I'll have to buy a preamp and another set of cables which not only adds to the expense but also to the complexity.


----------



## miketlse

sinae said:


> What i truly find sad is that they just decided not to add the volume control because they want to sell their hugo 2.. when in fact it would have cost NOTHING to include it and would save all of us tons of problem..
> 
> when you have a similar type of dac.. digital volume in the dac is a must.. try to find an ESS sabre dac without volume control and you will have a hard time why? because that volume is totally bitperfect and included in the chip.. doenst cost anything to add it..
> 
> and in canada.. chord dac are too costly anyway.. we are being backstabbed


I find it truly sad, that you obviously like the distortion introduced by COTS dac chips. It is best that you continue to frequent those types of products.
You also have a poor understanding of product lines - a product line strategy has 'slots' for several similar products that provide similar but different functionality:

the slot for the top of the range Hugo desktop dac/amp - TT
the slot for the middle of the range Hugo desktop dac/amp - Hugo (batteries + volume control)
the slot for the bottom of the range Hugo desktop dac, for principle use as a source for  a separate preamp/amp - Qute (no batteries + no volume control)
The slots remain constant, but the individual products get refreshed periodically.


----------



## Joe-Siow

sinae said:


> What i truly find sad is that they just decided not to add the volume control because they want to sell their hugo 2.. when in fact it would have cost NOTHING to include it and would save all of us tons of problem..
> 
> when you have a similar type of dac.. digital volume in the dac is a must.. try to find an ESS sabre dac without volume control and you will have a hard time why? because that volume is totally bitperfect and included in the chip.. doenst cost anything to add it..
> 
> and in canada.. chord dac are too costly anyway.. we are being backstabbed



If you are looking for a Chord DAC with volume control, what is wrong with the Hugo 2? Is there any reason(s) why you are not considering it?
Personally, it is a pointless exercise comparing Chord DACs to ESS Sabre DACs since one is FPGA while the other is a widely available chip used my many DAC makers.

I cannot speak for the others but I definitely prefer to use analog volume control over digital one any day.

And if Chord DACs are too costly in Canada, perhaps you can consider importing one from other countries or just consider a DAC in a comfortable budget. There is always a choice instead of using words like "backstabbed".


----------



## agedbest

Skampmeister said:


> I would not have bought a Qutest if it had volume control. Simplicity is the key. Not a product for you by the sounds of things, not a problem with the product.




qutest is so to the minimum terms ..... to not have a decent power supply


----------



## AlexB73 (Apr 14, 2018)

I don't have Qutest but 2qute sounds very good with included power supply.
Actually it sounds better than with some liniar power supplies.
But you can always do tweak in audio if you want. For other DACs you can buy power cords or fuses.
But not every tweak improves SQ.


----------



## agedbest

Unfortunately,...it is not my opinion only....

it is full of pages about this .... in this forum also...

It is a tradition of Chord that is perpetuated on this type of product .... see Qute HD ... 2Qute .... and Qutest also.

for the price at which Qutest is sold, it is an indecency a 2 cents power supply.


----------



## AlexB73

A lot of people in the internet write different kind of bull...
I don't believe. I check by myself.
I bought MRCU linear power supply for my 2qute.
I gave it 200 hours for burn-in.  I listened after that.
Near perfect tonal balance with switched Chord power supply was disapire.
I got glass ringing upper midrange and emphased mid-bass. The sound become odd and unmusical. I sold this linear power supply by half of the price I paid for it.
Yes, I believe some other linear power supplies may sound great with 2qute. But I don’t want to try. I’m happy with a cheap switched power supply supplied by Chord.


----------



## stickboy85

jayz said:


> Waiting for the 1st review. Getting one nevertheless, nothing like experiencing it in my own room and setup.



Same here, very much looking forward to hearing how the Qutest sounds with my KEF LS50 wireless speakers.


----------



## jayz

stickboy85 said:


> Same here, very much looking forward to hearing how the Qutest sounds with my KEF LS50 wireless speakers.



Once you get it, give it a good few hours/days of playing to settle down. Two months since I got mine, it is sounding super.

LS50s image well to start with so I would expect the Qutest will take it to the next level.


----------



## stickboy85

jayz said:


> Once you get it, give it a good few hours/days of playing to settle down. Two months since I got mine, it is sounding super.
> 
> LS50s image well to start with so I would expect the Qutest will take it to the next level.



That's what I'm hoping.
How's the timing on the Qutest, does it get the foot tapping!?


----------



## Eddie O

stickboy85 said:


> That's what I'm hoping.
> How's the timing on the Qutest, does it get the foot tapping!?



Mine has been playing for 150 hours now. I miss the warm sound of my Audiolab (foot tapping all day long), but the Qutest is fast, there is no smearing: bass is fast and dry.


----------



## RiseFall123

Differences of sounding between the Cutest in its warmer fikter and the Mojo?


----------



## stickboy85

Eddie O said:


> Mine has been playing for 150 hours now. I miss the warm sound of my Audiolab (foot tapping all day long), but the Qutest is fast, there is no smearing: bass is fast and dry.



Is that the MDAC or MDAC Plus? Was looking at that before the Qutest came along. 
Is the Qutest worth the additional cost?


----------



## dawktah2

musicman59 said:


> Chord is going to be at Axpona this weekend so I am planning on stopping by their room to see if I can get any information about shipping the Qutest to NA.
> I am also in the pre-order list.....



Were you able to get any insight?


----------



## musicman59

dawktah2 said:


> Were you able to get any insight?


I couldn’t talk to them but I saw Drew and he confirmed the issue is not just for NA. Production is halted due to an issue with the chassis sub-contator. A batch made had an issue and had to be scrapped. He is expecting them in 3 to 4 weeks.


----------



## panditji

I find it strange that people want the Qutest to be a one box solution when they personally own a preamp and a power amp instead of an integrated... I don't understand why the Qutest should have a volume control when it is meant to be used in a main/desktop system where there will be an integrated or a preamp to control the volume and 99% of the time there would be a remote as well to be able to do it.. If used with headphones, there is a Hugo 2 which is exactly the same as the Qutest...


----------



## daredevil_kk

panditji said:


> I find it strange that people want the Qutest to be a one box solution when they personally own a preamp and a power amp instead of an integrated... I don't understand why the Qutest should have a volume control when it is meant to be used in a main/desktop system where there will be an integrated or a preamp to control the volume and 99% of the time there would be a remote as well to be able to do it.. If used with headphones, there is a Hugo 2 which is exactly the same as the Qutest...


One word... Cheapskate


----------



## blueninjasix

daredevil_kk said:


> One word... Cheapskate





panditji said:


> I find it strange that people want the Qutest to be a one box solution when they personally own a preamp and a power amp instead of an integrated... I don't understand why the Qutest should have a volume control when it is meant to be used in a main/desktop system where there will be an integrated or a preamp to control the volume and 99% of the time there would be a remote as well to be able to do it.. If used with headphones, there is a Hugo 2 which is exactly the same as the Qutest...


My HiFi system has had but a single source for 30 years. I do not need a preamp to switch between sources. I have always used a passive preamp as a volume control but prefer the shorter signal path and reduced set of analogue interconnect cables that a volume control in the DAC would bring. A Hugo2 has this volume control but I don't need the headphone element or the battery element.


----------



## Skampmeister

Guys, complaining that the Qutest doesn’t have volume, or isn’t what you’d like…………………pointless.


----------



## Joe-Siow

blueninjasix said:


> My HiFi system has had but a single source for 30 years. I do not need a preamp to switch between sources. I have always used a passive preamp as a volume control but prefer the shorter signal path and reduced set of analogue interconnect cables that a volume control in the DAC would bring. A Hugo2 has this volume control but I don't need the headphone element or the battery element.



If that's the case, do keep a lookout for the update for TT. I'm pretty sure the Chord guys will be updating the TT soon after Hugo 2 & Qutest.


----------



## Whazzzup

Joe-Siow said:


> If that's the case, do keep a lookout for the update for TT. I'm pretty sure the Chord guys will be updating the TT soon after Hugo 2 & Qutest.


I dunno about that. I will be surprised if there is an announcement aug till  2019 about TT2. Not trying to second guess marketing but there is a lot going on in chord to ancillaries ch2 and dave completely. Not much interest in TT development. Frankly TT holds its own anyways.....


----------



## zek4u

I’m still thinking about a Hugo 2 because I want two outputs. One for a headphone amp and another for a preamp. Figure I can use one of the headphone outputs for the second but I wonder if that will hurt my performance. Don’t want to spend what I know the TT 2 will cost.


----------



## Eddie O

stickboy85 said:


> Is that the MDAC or MDAC Plus? Was looking at that before the Qutest came along.
> Is the Qutest worth the additional cost?



I have a Qdac. The Qutest is superior in unveiling the details. Bass is much tighter. But on my bright set, the qdac sounds much warmer and therefore more engaging.


----------



## Hummer25

Qutest arriving in the house this week, just need to go and pick it up. Will be trying with Innuos Zen mini and MacBook pro running Audirvana.
Got high expectations for Qutest even though I have been tortured listening to Dave and Blu2 for the last year or so. Will be running the Qutest through a valve preamp into a hybrid OTL MOSFET valve amp and some old school Spendor speakers. I will post back my thoughts in a week or so.


----------



## blueninjasix

Skampmeister said:


> Guys, complaining that the Qutest doesn’t have volume, or isn’t what you’d like…………………pointless.


It's not a complaint. It's a wish list for the future. If you don't ask, you don't get!


----------



## stickboy85

Hummer25 said:


> Qutest arriving in the house this week, just need to go and pick it up. Will be trying with Innuos Zen mini and MacBook pro running Audirvana.
> Got high expectations for Qutest even though I have been tortured listening to Dave and Blu2 for the last year or so. Will be running the Qutest through a valve preamp into a hybrid OTL MOSFET valve amp and some old school Spendor speakers. I will post back my thoughts in a week or so.



Look forward to hearing your thoughts on the Zen mini with the Qutest. I plan on picking up a Zen (maybe zenith!) after I've got the Qutest.

Hope the Qutest doesn't let u down after having DAVE in your ears!


----------



## Hummer25

stickboy85 said:


> Look forward to hearing your thoughts on the Zen mini with the Qutest. I plan on picking up a Zen (maybe zenith!) after I've got the Qutest.
> 
> Hope the Qutest doesn't let u down after having DAVE in your ears!



Dave with Blu2 m-scaler are simply an astonishingly great combination. It is the first  time I was convinced digital could sound as good as the best analogue. In fact I thought Dave Blu2 m-scaler sounded very analogue in its delivery. The soundstage  the m-scaler brings to the party is huge. I really hope that Chord bring out a reasonably priced stand alone m-scaler to use with the Qutest. I think the dual BNC connections are a massive hint!

I am not expecting DAVE performance but a Qutest m-scaler combination may get 70-80% there which would be good enough for me!


----------



## maxh22

Hummer25 said:


> Dave with Blu2 m-scaler are simply an astonishingly great combination. It is the first  time I was convinced digital could sound as good as the best analogue. In fact I thought Dave Blu2 m-scaler sounded very analogue in its delivery. The soundstage  the m-scaler brings to the party is huge. I really hope that Chord bring out a reasonably priced stand alone m-scaler to use with the Qutest. I think the dual BNC connections are a massive hint!
> 
> I am not expecting DAVE performance but a Qutest m-scaler combination may get 70-80% there which would be good enough for me!



So is Qutest going into a different system? Or are you replacing your BlueDave with qutest?


----------



## SearchOfSub (Apr 16, 2018)

SO does this sound same with Hugo2? Anyone compare Hugo2 or QUTEST with Lampizator BIG7? Which DAC should I get to pair with McIntosh MA252? Chord Qutest, Hugo2, or Lampizator BIG7?
Lampizator BIG7 is $12,000 BTW. ANyone do a comparison or heard all? For me a dillema becuse I just can't choose between Solid State setup or Tube setup this time around. For SS, I don't go with any other company beside Chord and Rob.  I have a McIntosh MA252 that is Hybrid SS and Tube for my Amplifier. But again I don't know if I should go Solid state for DAC or Tube. Either way, which one would you ultimately choose?


----------



## ra990

zek4u said:


> I’m still thinking about a Hugo 2 because I want two outputs. One for a headphone amp and another for a preamp. Figure I can use one of the headphone outputs for the second but I wonder if that will hurt my performance. Don’t want to spend what I know the TT 2 will cost.


I would like to know this as well. I always disconnect any connected cable when I plug in my headphones, even if it's not plugged in on the other end. What is the recommendation?


----------



## Hummer25

maxh22 said:


> So is Qutest going into a different system? Or are you replacing your BlueDave with qutest?



I don't own BlueDave but I listen to one regularly. It is out of my price range unfortunately hence my interest in trying the Qutest in my own system.


----------



## SearchOfSub (Apr 17, 2018)

Chord next move should have been a DAC + STREAMER on this unit and price it higher IDC with HUGO2 SQ like the rest of em out there like directstream jr. and aurelic vega g2 now all coming out with streaming capabailites.

And I hope in future Chord makes a SET TUBE DAC. It will be the bomb and knowing how popular Chord products are now it will take off definately. And also I hope ROB starts making CLASS A AMPLIFIERS for speakers that can do 250WPC and transparent as the HUGO's.

Hopefully chord now work on products for the tube lovers in future. IF chord had a Tube lineup I wouldnt have to be in this dillema I would just buy Chord Tube lineup because I trust Robs engineeering and music taste. it cannot go wrong seeing his history and exprience. Now i am stuck in this frustrating dillema bevcause i wanna go tube.


----------



## Hummer25

SearchOfSub said:


> Chord next move should have been a DAC + STREAMER on this unit and price it higher IDC with HUGO2 SQ like the rest of em out there like directstream jr. and aurelic vega g2 now all coming out with streaming capabailites.
> 
> And I hope in future Chord makes a SET TUBE DAC. It will be the bomb and knowing how popular Chord products are now it will take off definately. And also I hope ROB starts making CLASS A AMPLIFIERS for speakers that can do 250WPC and transparent as the HUGO's.
> 
> Hopefully chord now work on products for the tube lovers in future. IF chord had a Tube lineup I wouldnt have to be in this dillema I would just buy Chord Tube lineup because I trust Robs engineeering and music taste. it cannot go wrong seeing his history and exprience. Now i am stuck in this frustrating dillema bevcause i wanna go tube.




I have not heard a Chord DAC with a tube amp yet. All the DACs I have heard have been with SS Chord amps so it will be interesting to hear how the Qutest sounds with my tube set up?


----------



## jayz

SearchOfSub said:


> Chord next move should have been a DAC + STREAMER ...



We saw images of 2go a while ago (not sure whether there have been any updates since then) but I think it is safe to assume Hugo2 will get a streamer/player similar to poly. My own view is if 2go goes into production soon, it is likely that will be followed by an equivalent for the Qutest. To complicate the speculation game, we have to consider the possibility of a lower cost MScaler. With disc player manufacturers slowly disappearing ( latest being Oppo ) I would think the next MScaler will likely be integrated to a desktop digital player but it might be a while before we see such a product - all speculation of course.



SearchOfSub said:


> Hopefully chord now work on products for the tube lovers in future. IF chord had a Tube lineup I wouldnt have to be in this dillema I would just buy Chord Tube lineup because I trust Robs engineeering and music taste...



I would say it is very unlikely Rob will do tube gear - or even vinyl for that matter. He has been very clear that his goal is to fix current limitations on the digital side of things to make it sound as close to the actual performance as possible. So it is about accuracy and eliminating distortions of all forms - which does no align well with tube electronics. 



SearchOfSub said:


> Now i am stuck in this frustrating dillema bevcause i wanna go tube.



Maybe you should get a tube integrated amp and upstream digital can be all Chord?


----------



## SearchOfSub (Apr 17, 2018)

Edit.


----------



## Whazzzup

Disagree gsx mk2 ss provides an amazing microscope of ones dac, in my case TT. Excellent combo. I’m not sure if one needs to spend bludave monies although great if you can. May I suggest USB network music servers available now for considerably less, that do an amazing job. I understand an eco system but I like my options open.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

jayz said:


> I would think the next MScaler will likely be integrated to a desktop digital player but it might be a while before we see such a product - all speculation of course.


It seems that Chord would make an m-scaler network streamer for Qutest sooner or later. If it have support for MQA and Roon, I would buy such DAC-streamer combo in a heartbeat. I hope this hypothetical streamer would not be like Poly (overloaded with features and more expensive than it`s DAC). Qutest is a minimalist DAC - one function, great value. I hope it`s streamer would be the same.


----------



## x RELIC x

Ragnar-BY said:


> It seems that Chord would make an m-scaler network streamer for Qutest sooner or later. If it have support for MQA and Roon, I would buy such DAC-streamer combo in a heartbeat. I hope this hypothetical streamer would not be like Poly (overloaded with features and more expensive than it`s DAC). Qutest is a minimalist DAC - one function, great value. I hope it`s streamer would be the same.



It seems MQA will never be implemented in Chord DACs if Rob has anything to say about it. Hint: he’s not a fan of MQA due to high levels of aliasing vs his WTA.


----------



## stickboy85

Ragnar-BY said:


> It seems that Chord would make an m-scaler network streamer for Qutest sooner or later. If it have support for MQA and Roon, I would buy such DAC-streamer combo in a heartbeat. I hope this hypothetical streamer would not be like Poly (overloaded with features and more expensive than it`s DAC). Qutest is a minimalist DAC - one function, great value. I hope it`s streamer would be the same.



I hope your right!
Can't see Chord ever supporting MQA to be honest. Not that it would be problem once Roon updates to support MQA's 1st unfold.


----------



## Skampmeister

I’m not fussed, I bought a Mytek Brooklyn to accompany the Qutest for MQA duties.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

x RELIC x said:


> It seems MQA will never be implemented in Chord DACs if Rob has anything to say about it. Hint: he’s not a fan of MQA due to high levels of aliasing vs his WTA.


Well, I think Rob do not have to like MQA to add it`s support. I like what PS Audio did - they said they don`t like MQA, but added it because the customers asked for it.

I don`t care if MQA is better or worse than DSD or other hi-res formats. I also don`t care if it is technically lossy or not. Like many other people here, my main music source is Tidal. With Tidal I don`t have an option of any other hi-res format, it`s MQA or 16/44. While there are a lot of different opinions about how MQA sounds, to me Tidal Masters sounds better then Tidal Hi-Fi. And I have to say that full hardware decoding sounds distinctly better, than "1st unfold" by software. I`ve tried various records in various setups, so I`m pretty sure about what is better for my ears. 

At this point I would not buy any more or less expensive device without an MQA support. Maybe this would change in future, if I found better streaming service, maybe not. For now Tidal works perfect for me.


----------



## flyte3333

x RELIC x said:


> It seems MQA will never be implemented in Chord DACs if Rob has anything to say about it. Hint: he’s not a fan of MQA due to high levels of aliasing vs his WTA.



But putting it in the streamer (as suggested by Ragnar) would not be putting it in the DAC. Similar to PS Audio’s Bridge II implementation.

Also John says the 1st MQA unfold is ok, at the end of this video:



So the 1st unfold may come to a Chord streamer/Poly/2go one day? It’s not completely out of the question.

Any further ‘unfolding’ beyond the 1st unfold can be ruled out, per the video above.


----------



## x RELIC x

If you guys like MQA that’s great. I was simply posting regarding the DAC or M scaler (Rob’s intellectual property) regarding a ‘full’ implementation of MQA which isn’t what happens in the first unfolding (apologies for not being specific there). Also, John may very well endorse MQA in a seperate streamer (I doubt a streamer would include an M scaler) as he would want to sell as many units to as wide an audience as possible, but I didn’t mention John did I?


----------



## flyte3333

x RELIC x said:


> If you guys like MQA that’s great.



I would prefer MQA go away. I'm just trying to stick to facts, as close as possible anyway.



x RELIC x said:


> (apologies for not being specific there)



Not a problem.


----------



## Skampmeister

I didn’t like MQA till I got the Brooklyn, and I’ve listened to MQA through a Bluesound Node2, which is “supposed” to be a full decoder, but never liked its sound. With the Brooklyn, I look for MQA now.


----------



## jarnopp

Ragnar-BY said:


> It seems that Chord would make an m-scaler network streamer for Qutest sooner or later. If it have support for MQA and Roon, I would buy such DAC-streamer combo in a heartbeat. I hope this hypothetical streamer would not be like Poly (overloaded with features and more expensive than it`s DAC). Qutest is a minimalist DAC - one function, great value. I hope it`s streamer would be the same.



Which features of Poly do you consider bloated in the context of a streamer?  I could see not needing an SD card reader, but in its place you might want an external storage plug. You may not need Bluetooth, but then you might want a remote control, or other switch to control the mode (Roon, DLNA, DSD, etc). I think the Poly would be a great starting point and since they have the boards already, they get a lot of leverage.


----------



## maxxevv

SearchOfSub said:


> Chord next move should have been a DAC + STREAMER on this unit and price it higher IDC with HUGO2 SQ like the rest of em out there like directstream jr. and aurelic vega g2 now all coming out with streaming capabailites.
> 
> And I hope in future Chord makes a SET TUBE DAC. It will be the bomb and knowing how popular Chord products are now it will take off definately. And also I hope ROB starts making CLASS A AMPLIFIERS for speakers that can do 250WPC and transparent as the HUGO's.
> 
> Hopefully chord now work on products for the tube lovers in future. IF chord had a Tube lineup I wouldnt have to be in this dillema I would just buy Chord Tube lineup because I trust Robs engineeering and music taste. it cannot go wrong seeing his history and exprience. Now i am stuck in this frustrating dillema bevcause i wanna go tube.



Tubes will be in direct contradiction with what Chord and Rob are constantly trying to achieve. And that is exactness in digital reproduction of audio. 
If you have the opportunity, attend one of the talks Rob does at audio shows.  You'll get a better picture of what Chord have been trying to achieve all these years and the reasoning behind the approach to digital decoding and reproduction they have taken. 

If its the same guys running the company for the foreseeable future,  tube sets are not going to happen with/from Chord.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

jarnopp said:


> Which features of Poly do you consider bloated in the context of a streamer?  I could see not needing an SD card reader, but in its place you might want an external storage plug. You may not need Bluetooth, but then you might want a remote control, or other switch to control the mode (Roon, DLNA, DSD, etc). I think the Poly would be a great starting point and since they have the boards already, they get a lot of leverage.


Well, on the second thought you might be right about Poly features  My mobile listening is very limited, so I`m not the best expert here. At home all I need is Roon or DLNA.


----------



## jarnopp

Ragnar-BY said:


> Well, on the second thought you might be right about Poly features  My mobile listening is very limited, so I`m not the best expert here. At home all I need is Roon or DLNA.



Yeah, that’s all I use, Roon at home or DLNA/Airplay on the go, but apparently Glider now uses MPD to control the soundcard via DLNA. I don’t need to understand it all, but it does sound great. So great, that I’m sure a Poly with desktop mode, like Hugo2 (this because I think it may be quieter than only running off PS), and a few modifications (like external storage port instead of SD card,  addition of optical output, maybe coax), and you’d have a true winner for Qutest, Dave, Blu, Hugo TT, etc. even at $999-1200, that would be a no brained for me.


----------



## miketlse

SearchOfSub said:


> And also I hope ROB starts making CLASS A AMPLIFIERS for speakers that can do 250WPC and transparent as the HUGO's.


Probably unlikely.
Rob is the digital amplifier expert for Chord, so I doubt that he would be involved with a tube amplifier design.
John Franks is the analogue amplifier expert at Chord, and was responsible for the TToby. If Chord did ever produce a tube amplifier, then he would be more likely to be involved than Rob.
Having said that, I don't think Chord would waste time on a tube amplifier, if their digital amplifiers turn out as good as expected.


----------



## AlexB73

All speakers that need 250WPC amplifier sound for me compressed and unmusical.


----------



## Mrandrade (Apr 18, 2018)

Hello everyone .. @Rob Watts, I bought a Qutest today. My preamp is a Tag McLaren PA20  with multiple gain levels. What do you think is the best: Set the DAC to a 3 volt output and decrease the gain of the preamplifier or regulate the output to 1 or 2 volts and increase the gain in the Preamp? Thanks in advance


----------



## dolphy007

(I.e.

Hello everyone .. @Rob Watts, I bought a Qutest today. My preamp is a McLaren PA20 Tag with multiple gain levels. What do you think is best: Set the DAC to a 3 volt output and decrease the gain of the preamplifier or regulate the output to 1 or 2 volts and increase the gain in the Préamp? Thanks in advance


----------



## Rob Watts

It all depends upon the pre-amp; some have volume controls, then an active stage, so 3v would be best; some have active stage, then volume, then active stage; and it's that type that may need a lower voltage, as the 3v may induce distortion. I have no experience of the PA20, so best advice is to try different levels and listen to which one is best sounding - and if you can't hear a difference then don't worry!


----------



## x RELIC x

Rob Watts said:


> and if you can't hear a difference then don't worry!



Man, I wish I read this more on the forums!


----------



## jayz (Apr 19, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> All speakers that need 250WPC amplifier sound for me compressed and unmusical.



Diverting off topic but I think it would be wrong to generalise that far...

The power required by a speaker to properly sing is dependent on its impedance profile, sensitivity, and other design factors. Also the problem is speakers are voiced for different degrees of presence and therefore, some require a vast amount of space to properly sing, try listening to a pair of PMC IB2SE speakers in a small sized livingroom and it will sound compressed. Same goes for B&W 802Dx, Focal Utopia, TAD Compact Refs  and pretty much most top end speakers of any brand. But these are supposed to be high resolution speakers - so I think the industry has failed ( deliberate ? I don't know) to convey the message that unless buyers are able to provide a suitable setting for their top-end speakers, it is pointless buying them.

I do agree however, that there are indeed well engineered speakers voiced mid-field to suit realistic domestic settings, and some would only require modest power. When the room and placement suits the speakers, the result is more likely to be uncompressed, detailed, rhythmic sound with plenty finesse - some call this musical.


----------



## AlexB73

Hi jayz,

I listened different modern Hi Res speakers (Focal Utopia and Electra BE, Wilson Watt/Puppy6 and Alexia, B&W 804,…). And I come to conclusion – it is not my cup of tea.
But I was blown away when I first time listened big midrange front horns with Lowthers and 15 inch woofers installation. Musicality, dynamic and real resolution was incomparable to other stuff that I had been listened before. It was 15 years ago.
Since that time my direction is high sensitivity speakers and tube SET amplifiers.

Regards,
Alex.


----------



## ray-dude

AlexB73 said:


> Hi jayz,
> 
> I listened different modern Hi Res speakers (Focal Utopia and Electra BE, Wilson Watt/Puppy6 and Alexia, B&W 804,…). And I come to conclusion – it is not my cup of tea.
> But I was blown away when I first time listened big midrange front horns with Lowthers and 15 inch woofers installation. Musicality, dynamic and real resolution was incomparable to other stuff that I had been listened before. It was 15 years ago.
> ...



I'll echo this.  I've been a lifetime B&W guy, and finally got my dream speakers several years ago (802d3's).  I made the mistake of listening to DAVE and Hugo2 with Omega Super Alnico Monitors, and it tuned my audiophile world upside down.  I now have Voxativ 9.87's as my primary 2 channel speakers (being driven directly from DAVE) and Omega Super Alnico monitors as my surround speakers.  

The imaging is so precise with the Voxativs (or other single driver speakers) that the phantom center I get is as good or better than any center channel speaker, so I'm running in a quad configuration for surround

If you haven't had a chance to listening to Chord kit on high efficiency single driver speakers direct, you really need to seek it out.  I consider a 3rd way to listen to recorded music (headphones and traditional 2 channel being the other two...very distinct experience, and a very intoxicating one for me)


----------



## plsvn (Apr 19, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> Since that time my direction is high sensitivity speakers and tube SET amplifiers.



3W 2A3 SET amplifier + Klipsch Cornwall here: everything else can (and, over time, will) change apart these


----------



## AlexB73 (Apr 19, 2018)

I have been using vintage Altec 604”E” since 2005.
They are so sensitive that can by driven by Mojo directly in midsize room.
But I prefer use them with 2Qute and 300B integrative SET amplifier. 
I also listen  a lot of vinyl.


----------



## Skampmeister

x RELIC x said:


> Man, I wish I read this more on the forums!



Because it’s hard to not hear a difference when ones constantly looking for one


----------



## dcp10

Anyone else stuck with a really long wait for their Qutest?

- I ordered mine back on 9 March and was given a 4-5 week waiting time. Now, after 6 weeks, I'm still waiting, with no sign of any timescale. Am I the mug who missed the boat, or are there others out there with similarly-long waiting times?


----------



## dawktah2

dcp10 said:


> Anyone else stuck with a really long wait for their Qutest?
> 
> - I ordered mine back on 9 March and was given a 4-5 week waiting time. Now, after 6 weeks, I'm still waiting, with no sign of any timescale. Am I the mug who missed the boat, or are there others out there with similarly-long waiting times?



Me too! Since 2/23


----------



## plsvn (Apr 23, 2018)

the italian reseller, here in Milan, got two in late february
I immediately bought one (and canceled an order, from abroad, that was only bouncing me over and over) but the second one... is still there unsold


----------



## agedbest

find an other one used.....
https://www.leboncoin.fr/image_son/1418121647.htm/?ca=12_s

and it is not the first found on sale after date of launch.....Uhmmm
something doesn't like to people


----------



## musicman59

dcp10 said:


> Anyone else stuck with a really long wait for their Qutest?
> 
> - I ordered mine back on 9 March and was given a 4-5 week waiting time. Now, after 6 weeks, I'm still waiting, with no sign of any timescale. Am I the mug who missed the boat, or are there others out there with similarly-long waiting times?


I am on the same boat. I ordered mine on March 27th and the latest information from my dealer is that they are expected here in the USA around mid May. I had a 2Qute and really liked it so I am sticking to my order and ride it out.


----------



## soares

I am still waiting for my order. It seems they will arrive by the end of this month...


----------



## dcp10

Well, what a difference 24 hours makes... My Qutest arrived this afternoon - haven't had time to listen to it yet, but the box certainly looks impressive!


----------



## Paul Bjernklo

I have the Hugo 2, that I am very happy with but I see that the Qutest got the “Editor’s Choice” accolade in the latest magazine of Hi-fi Choice (UK mag) from the excellent reviewer David Price who in my mind is one of the most trustworthy reviewers so you guys that are waiting should be salivating... 

And no I don’t have the review to post it but it may be on the web soon but may be worth reading for the ones that prefer reviews from a more professional (in my view) standpoint than user comments. I know that not everyone does... but thought I would mention in case someone is interested. Congratulations to Chord!


----------



## Hummer25

I will have a Qutest in the house next week so looking forward to hearing what it can do!


----------



## JWahl

My U.S. dealer also notified me that he is being shipped the Qutest.  So hopefully mine will arrive sometime next week.


----------



## Mrandrade (Apr 25, 2018)

Hello everyone, my Qutest has arrived for 1 week, it's been playing ever since ...
At first I found the sound image a bit confusing ... I saw the middle ones sound a little "metallic" ... During the first days I missed my old Qute HD that I always found very definite and musical ...
Now it seems a lot better, especially after using a battery as a power supply
I'll give you my opinion later.
@ Rob Watts, a question:  in the USB operation does it only work at 32 bit?
That's upsamplling right?
or I'm doing something wrong?
thanks in advance


----------



## Mrandrade

[QUOTE = "AlexB73, post: 14149949, membro: 463904"] Oi Christer,

Você gosta de Qutest para reprodução de música simfônica?
Você vê algum problema na dinâmica?
Eu também gosto de discos históricos de música clássica da época de 78 RPM.
Eu gosto de Pearl e Opus Kura remasterizando sem limpeza de ruído maciça (que mata dinâmica e faz a música morrer).
Você ouve discos históricos de música clássica no Qutest?

Saudações,
Alex. [/ QUOTE]


----------



## Rob Watts

Mrandrade said:


> Hello everyone, my Qutest has arrived for 1 week, it's been playing ever since ...
> At first I found the sound image a bit confusing ... I saw the middle ones sound a little "metallic" ... During the first days I missed my old Qute HD that I always found very definite and musical ...
> Now it seems a lot better, especially after using a battery as a power supply
> I'll give you my opinion later.
> ...



USB operation is always 32 bits - when you have a 16 bit source, the bottom 16 bits are simply set to zero. 

You need to ensure that the data is bit perfect, that means the source does not upsample nor convert the data in any way. You will get poor results if a 44.1k file is upsampled, so check that with 44.1k you get red as the sample rate.


----------



## soares

Mrandrade said:


> [QUOTE = "AlexB73, post: 14149949, membro: 463904"] Oi Christer,
> 
> Você gosta de Qutest para reprodução de música simfônica?
> Você vê algum problema na dinâmica?
> ...


Oi Alex. Bem vindo ao Fórum. O  meu Qutest. só chega em maio. Depois darei notícias. Abraço. Jorge


----------



## Mrandrade

[QUOTE = "Rob Watts, post: 14197558, member: 394072"] A operação USB é sempre de 32 bits - quando você tem uma fonte de 16 bits, os 16 bits inferiores são simplesmente ajustados para zero.

Você precisa garantir que os dados estejam um pouco perfeitos, o que significa que a fonte não faz o upsample nem converte os dados de nenhuma maneira. Você obterá resultados ruins se um arquivo de 44.1k for submetido a upsampled, portanto, verifique com 44.1k que você fica vermelho como a taxa de amostragem. [/ QUOTE]


----------



## Mrandrade

Mrandrade said:


> [QUOTE = "Rob Watts, post: 14197558, member: 394072"] A operação USB é sempre de 32 bits - quando você tem uma fonte de 16 bits, os 16 bits inferiores são simplesmente ajustados para zero.
> 
> Você precisa garantir que os dados estejam um pouco perfeitos, o que significa que a fonte não faz o upsample nem converte os dados de nenhuma maneira. Você obterá resultados ruins se um arquivo de 44.1k for submetido a upsampled, portanto, verifique com 44.1k que você fica vermelho como a taxa de amostragem. [/ QUOTE]


----------



## Mrandrade

The source is Tidal Hi-fi and Spotify playng in my Mac mini


----------



## dawktah2

Can anyone give me an idea what I can expect comparing the Qutest to a ESS Sabre ES9018 chip implementation? I've read that the chip is "bright?"

I've heard that the North America Qutest are shipping but I haven't gotten an email from Moon Audio. I have two DAC that both use this chip. So looking for impressions in this regard

Anxiously waiting...


----------



## soares

I am using a 9038 chip (Oppo 205) while waiting for my Qutest. With an ultraRendu the sound is better that the one from my 2qute except for the sound stage and the separation of instruments/vocals. I don't find the 9038 bright.


----------



## Skampmeister (Apr 25, 2018)

I’m using a 9028 in a Mytek Brooklyn and have a Qutest also. Yes, the ESS is brighter. And I have a 9038 in a Oppo 205 and that DAC I never even bother using.


----------



## SearchOfSub

Anyone compare Lampizator BIG5 and UP to the Chord Hugo 2 or the QUTEST?


----------



## SearchOfSub

miketlse said:


> Probably unlikely.
> Rob is the digital amplifier expert for Chord, so I doubt that he would be involved with a tube amplifier design.
> John Franks is the analogue amplifier expert at Chord, and was responsible for the TToby. If Chord did ever produce a tube amplifier, then he would be more likely to be involved than Rob.
> Having said that, I don't think Chord would waste time on a tube amplifier, if their digital amplifiers turn out as good as expected.




What do you mean waste of time. You talk like making tube gear is a waste of time. Engineering is not only about solid state side of thing. Engineering is engineering. A good engineer will make a Tube, solid state gear in Audio side of things. Yes, even speakers. Or just maybe, even cars & airplanes. Doesn't matter. Most fall short so choose to go one route because they can't hang with both side of things and it's 100% understandable. It's cutting someone short of their engineering when you limit. I thought Rob made the CD player BluMK2? Who knows what he will make for Chord in future. Whatever he makes, with his musical input and engineering, I think it will be good! And I hope Chord and Rob engineer future headphones, speakers, and even 250WPC class A amplifiers. It sure will be nice to see a Chord's version of KEF LS50Wirless with Rob's own DAC, AMP, and own engineered Speakers All-in-one put out on the market. I do think it will be alot of work though. Maybe too much.


----------



## dac64

SearchOfSub said:


> What do you mean waste of time. You talk like making tube gear is a waste of time. Engineering is not only about solid state side of thing. Engineering is engineering. A good engineer will make a Tube, solid state gear in Audio side of things. Yes, even speakers. Or just maybe, even cars



I like!

A good cook should know how to cook everything  best!


----------



## Skampmeister

I’ll eat my shorts the day Chord go valve, won’t happen.


----------



## miketlse

dac64 said:


> I like!
> 
> A good cook should know how to cook everything  best!


You obviously like your hifi and food, produced by people who are 'jack of all trades, and master of none'.


----------



## miketlse

Skampmeister said:


> I’ll eat my shorts the day Chord go valve, won’t happen.


Ask @dac64 to suggest one of the good cooks that he knows.


----------



## dawktah2 (Apr 26, 2018)

SearchOfSub said:


> What do you mean waste of time. You talk like making tube gear is a waste of time. Engineering is not only about solid state side of thing. Engineering is engineering. A good engineer will make a Tube, solid state gear in Audio side of things. Yes, even speakers. Or just maybe, even cars & airplanes. Doesn't matter. Most fall short so choose to go one route because they can't hang with both side of things and it's 100% understandable. It's cutting someone short of their engineering when you limit. I thought Rob made the CD player BluMK2? Who knows what he will make for Chord in future. Whatever he makes, with his musical input and engineering, I think it will be good! And I hope Chord and Rob engineer future headphones, speakers, and even 250WPC class A amplifiers. It sure will be nice to see a Chord's version of KEF LS50Wirless with Rob's own DAC, AMP, and own engineered Speakers All-in-one put out on the market. I do think it will be alot of work though. Maybe too much.



Well two things, I've read a review of the Woo Audio WA33 and it is described as being very solid state in its sound not very tubey. Second is this: http://www.westernelectric.com/products/300b.html

EDIT: 2 hours later, received email Qutest is shipping to me! Hooray!


----------



## Leogaluc666

I'm curious has anyone been successfully  driving a pair of powered speaker directly out of the Qutest ?

Same question for iems ?

Thanks.


----------



## Chiswickian

I've got a Qutest and am looking to get an SMS200Ultra and a new USB cable to go with.  Do you know if I can get away with an unpowered USB cable or do I need one with a power leg also for handshaking with any streamers/servers?


----------



## bmfmarius (Apr 26, 2018)

Get the USB with power, the protocol works with 4 wires!
Btw, good choice going for the sotm 200 ultra.. I do think that is maybe the best streaming / source around! Get a good linnear power supply. It's a must!!!


----------



## TSAVAlan

Qutest Unboxing Video!

Did the unboxing a few weeks ago, like right before CanJam SoCal but was waiting for the Qutest to start getting delivered before uploading!


----------



## musicman59

my Qutest shipped today. I will be receiving it on Monday!


----------



## elviscaprice (Apr 26, 2018)

Chiswickian said:


> I've got a Qutest and am looking to get an SMS200Ultra and a new USB cable to go with.  Do you know if I can get away with an unpowered USB cable or do I need one with a power leg also for handshaking with any streamers/servers?


Qutest has GI, so yes on this leg to DAC need 5VBUS.   From source to SOtM component, no, not needed.  Highly recommend bypassing fixers/renderers and going to a single server, DIY sCLK-EX server for best bang for buck. 
Not as critical as what follows your Quest or upgrade to future add on m-scaler.


----------



## dac64

miketlse said:


> Ask @dac64 to suggest one of the good cooks that he knows.



No need to go far! nearby Mac cheese burger is good!


----------



## dawktah2

Delivery scheduled Saturday April 28th by end of day!


----------



## soares

Still wainting for a final date...


----------



## SearchOfSub

dac64 said:


> I like!
> 
> A good cook should know how to cook everything  best!




Hahaha +1 my friend! 




dawktah2 said:


> Well two things, I've read a review of the Woo Audio WA33 and it is described as being very solid state in its sound not very tubey. Second is this: http://www.westernelectric.com/products/300b.html
> 
> EDIT: 2 hours later, received email Qutest is shipping to me! Hooray!




That 300B sure is a beauty! Thank you for the link I might just pick it up once it becomes available.

Also very interested in the Chord Qutest DAC! Please do leave impressions - It's always helpful!


----------



## Chiswickian

elviscaprice said:


> Qutest has GI, so yes on this leg to DAC need 5VBUS.   From source to SOtM component, no, not needed.  Highly recommend bypassing fixers/renderers and going to a single server, DIY sCLK-EX server for best bang for buck.
> Not as critical as what follows your Quest or upgrade to future add on m-scaler.



Thank you for confirming that.  Much appreciated.  I do like the sound of a DIY sCLK-EX server.  Do you know of any easy-to-follow/build designs for one floating around?


----------



## elviscaprice (Apr 27, 2018)

Chiswickian said:


> Thank you for confirming that.  Much appreciated.  I do like the sound of a DIY sCLK-EX server.  Do you know of any easy-to-follow/build designs for one floating around?


In this monster thread on CA is mine and others builds.  Basically you will pick out a mobo, casing, hard drive, power supply to send to SOtM who will perform the clock modifications and send back to you.  There are many options to this build.  Everyone that has done the build up to this point has used a low power mobo that can be powered via 12V external PS. 
https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...y-improve-the-sq-of-computer-audio-streaming/


----------



## alanb

Rob Watts said:


> You will get poor results if a 44.1k file is upsampled, so check that with 44.1k you get red as the sample rate.



Can I just confirm my understanding: my Auralic Aries has the capability to upsample to 705.6 kHz. Are you saying I shouldn’t use this with the Qutest as it will sound worse than leaving it at 44.1?

Thanks

Alan


----------



## SilverEars

I personally don't like upsampled either.  I like bit-perfect.  Use the WASAPI mode of the DAC choosing the rate based on the file itself.


----------



## ATXKyle

alanb said:


> Can I just confirm my understanding: my Auralic Aries has the capability to upsample to 705.6 kHz. Are you saying I shouldn’t use this with the Qutest as it will sound worse than leaving it at 44.1?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Alan


I upsample 44.1 to 352.8 to my 2Qute and I think it provides a marginal improvement.


----------



## dawktah2

Bit-Perfect


----------



## elviscaprice (Apr 27, 2018)

Problem with upsampling/filtering at the server is that you can create electrical noise at the server, greater mobo power needed, defeating the purpose to begin with for upsampling/filtering.  Best done at the DAC for Chord in my opinion and experience.


----------



## dawktah2 (Apr 28, 2018)

Qutest arrived today and have been listening for a couple of hours. WOW, this DAC sounds different! It should come with a warning not to listen for the first time alone in house by yourself, LOL. It clearly resolves sounds others I've had cannot. The bass is so low it sounds like its in the basement. "Mountains" from Interstellar soundtrack no longer has the distortion from the choir! Just clear.

I can say this is the best audio investment I've ever made, thank you Chord.

.


----------



## Arniesb

dawktah2 said:


> Qutest arrived today and have been listening for a couple of hours. WOW, this DAC sounds different! It should come with a warning not to listen for the first time alone in house by yourself, LOL. It clearly resolves sounds others I've had cannot. The bass is so low it sounds like its in the basement. "Mountains" from Interstellar soundtrack no longer has the distortion from the choir! Just clear.
> 
> I can say this is the best audio investment I've ever made, thank you Chord.
> 
> .


Just stop it please ...


----------



## soares

Yes please. I still do not have an arrival date...


----------



## Mrandrade

Hello everyone,
My Qutest is already with more than 200 hours of music and finally it's sounding great!
Musical, good image with a huge dynamic range ...
@Rob Watts, what features advises for battery / powerbank to buy?
Regards
Manel


----------



## Mrandrade

[QUOTE = "Joe-Siow, post: 14156155, member: 159547"] A correspondência é muito importante. Sendo proprietário de um Qutest, eu não diria que é um som brilhante. Tem muito boa transparência e detalhes embora.

Qual amplificador você tem na cadeia? O 804D3 também é muito transparente e se concentra mais em detalhes, então talvez o cabeamento de cobre seja mais adequado no sistema. [/ QUOTE]
In the beginning i feel de same.
Depois de 200 hours playng every thing is better.


----------



## Rob Watts

Mrandrade said:


> Hello everyone,
> My Qutest is already with more than 200 hours of music and finally it's sounding great!
> Musical, good image with a huge dynamic range ...
> @Rob Watts, what features advises for battery / powerbank to buy?
> ...


I used a 100W/h battery bank, that had 5v/2.1A USB output. This is better rated that what Qutest actually needs.


----------



## Mrandrade

Thanks


----------



## Mrandrade

The time go's on and Qutest stills better snd better


----------



## musicman59 (May 1, 2018)

I just received mine yesterday and is in the burn-in process.


----------



## miketlse

musicman59 said:


> I just mine yesterday and is in the burn-in process.


Fingers crossed for you.
Almost all the owners post how much they enjoy their Qutest.


----------



## AlexB73

Do Canadian sellers ship Qutest ?


----------



## musicman59

miketlse said:


> Fingers crossed for you.
> Almost all the owners post how much they enjoy their Qutest.


It sounds good and detailed just out of the box, I just hope the bass opens up after burn-in.


----------



## miketlse

AlexB73 said:


> Do Canadian sellers ship Qutest ?


Bluebird are the US/Canada distributors, so there are canadian dealers, eg https://www.hifiheadphones.ca/brands/Chord-Electronics.html.
The Chord website has a dealer locator, and it appears that there are several dealers.


----------



## Rob Watts

Rob Watts said:


> I used a 100W/h battery bank, that had 5v/2.1A USB output. This is better rated that what Qutest actually needs.



@Mrandrade asked me via a PM what bank I used, so I got it out of my bag. It is actually 85W/h, and is Poweradd Pilot pro 2. I have had a number of banks before, this is the best so far as it is reliable and seems well made.


----------



## dcp10

As a new Qutest owner, I wonder if I could please direct a couple of question to Rob Watts?

1. Burn In.
Many users have commented on a "burn in" process, and the sound improving over many hours of use. Do you have any thoughts about this - what is the physics of "burn in", or is it simply a psychological phenomenon whereby a customer simply becomes attuned to their new piece of hardware?

2. Improvements for High Bit-Rate Recordings
I understand how your FGPA algorithms can improve the sound from low data-rate recordings such as CD - I guess you're doing a better job of reconstructing the waveform from a paucity of data - but I'm not so clear why there is still an improvement for high data-rate recordings (such as my brilliantly-recorded and mastered 24-bit 192 kHz Linn classical recordings). I'm comparing against my Naim streamer which, I believe, uses Burr-Brown chips.

Many thanks - and thanks again for the great sound.


----------



## bmfmarius

> 1. Burn In.
> Many users have commented on a "burn in" process, and the sound improving over many hours of use. Do you have any thoughts about this - what is the physics of "burn in", or is it simply a psychological phenomenon whereby a customer simply becomes attuned to their new piece of hardware?


Until Rob answers, my opinion is that the burn in process is more likely to happen with the owner's brain/ ears combo than with the unit itself!


----------



## Skampmeister

Agree, my Qutest sounds exactly the same as it did on day one.


----------



## jayz (May 2, 2018)

RE: Does Qutest sound better than chip DACs? it definitely does in my setup.

The Quest replaced a Wolfson WM8741 based DAC built into my active speakers. Previous to that, I had tried NAD M51 and found the in-build DAC to be better.

Playing well recorded 24/96 or 24/192 tracks, Qutest gives a sense of depth and soundstage that is simply unbelievable. One of my favourite albums is LSO's Britten War Requiem http://www.bowers-wilkins.co.uk/Soc...ianandrea-noseda-lso-britten-war-requiem.html
Listen to track 5, the orchestra sounds so 3D to the extent that you could imagine the airflow from brass instruments carrying the sound from behind the venue towards the front and the acoustics of the venu adding to that sense of being there.

From a technical point of view, I think Robs magic filter algorithms work at very high frequencies so will help to reduce the "time smear" far beyond what a typical DAC can do even with hi-res material. I know several DACs now do up-sampling to 384 kHz but the magic must be in the implementation of sinc function which means it might be functioning close (enough?) to what Shannon Nyquist expressed with their maths. My understanding is that that is just one (of many) features that make the design very special.


----------



## jarnopp

bmfmarius said:


> Until Rob answers, my opinion is that the burn in process is more likely to happen with the owner's brain/ ears combo than with the unit itself!



And Rob has answered this question several times. You can search his posts, but here is one:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...n-3rd-post-◄★☆.784602/page-1298#post-12696849


----------



## AlexB73 (May 2, 2018)

Qutest has 3 volt RMS output. It is 3 x 2 x sq(2) = ~8.5 volt peak to peak.
So you need ~10-12 volts VDD. 
Qutest has to have internal switched power supply inside to get 10-12 volts from 5 volt.


----------



## NickedWicked

Anyone tried the Qutest with a Violectric V281?


----------



## JWahl

I got mine in today.  I'm waiting to pass any serious judgements, but so far it's positive.  The Qutest feels very substantial and looks even better in person.  Very classy.  For today though, I'm stuck using it only with the iCan SE.  I forgot that I don't have any spare RCA cables so I had to order some more and they should be here tomorrow.  I've been using a Y-cable with the Mojo, which I can use with the 3.5mm input on the iCan for the time being.  I'm more looking forward to trying the Qutest with the Massdrop CTH when the cables arrive tomorrow.  I preferred the CTH of the iCan with the Mojo, so I suspect it may be the same with the Qutest.

I also made the mistake of using it first with the iUSB, then going back to the stock supply.  I definitely prefer the iUSB with it.  It seems to give a little more clarity and resolution that pushes it closer to what I remember the Dave sounding like.

Compared to the Mojo, it's a noticeable improvement.  Better bass definition, separation, air, and dynamics.  The more prominent treble on the Qutest will require some adjustment, but I've found the green filter to help tame that a bit.  Again, very early impressions from about 3 or so hours of listening.  More will come later.


----------



## Rob Watts

dcp10 said:


> As a new Qutest owner, I wonder if I could please direct a couple of question to Rob Watts?
> 
> 1. Burn In.
> Many users have commented on a "burn in" process, and the sound improving over many hours of use. Do you have any thoughts about this - what is the physics of "burn in", or is it simply a psychological phenomenon whereby a customer simply becomes attuned to their new piece of hardware?
> ...


Yes hardware burn in is for sure a real phenomenon, and something I have fought against for several decades. In the past it was a major issue; DAC's used to measure differently on warm up and when broken in. This was because conventional DAC's - particularly in the 90's - were horribly sensitive to lots of imperfections. Indeed, this was the primary focus to develop pulse array; I wanted the musical benefits of PDM or DSD, but with more transparency, and with much lower levels of distortion and noise. In particular, I wanted every DAC to measure exactly the same, which meant removing lots of sensitivity to different aspects of a DAC design. Thus can only be done at the nuts and bolts level; that's why I had to invent a new DAC architecture, with pulse array. 
What I get now is every DAC on production measures exactly the same, with noise within one dB, and THD almost identical; and this has been done by removing inconsistent behaviour; for example, electrolytic capacitors take 3 months for leakage current to reduce, and also takes that long for bass distortion to reduce; so the design has completely eliminated the use of these capacitors. That's just one example of many.
So for sure you will not get a change in measured performance at all, even when cold. But that does not affect the impression that sound quality improves; and this is a very real effect too. I suspect this is brain break in; getting used to a different presentation, and for the brain to unlearn the mechanisms we have adopted to work around sound quality issues. With Hugo 1 I felt 9 months in it was still sounding better; but a brand new unit sent to me from chord sounded identical!
So I would not be surprised if you hear a change with time; but I don't think it is a hardware issue. That said, the DAC does sound slightly warmer after being on for ten minutes...
As to your comments about HD recording yes the WTA filter will also improve those. This is because 192k as a format is still no where near accurate enough; just hear a 768 k recording! These sound very different to a 192k...


----------



## dcp10

Rob Watts said:


> Yes hardware burn in is for sure a real phenomenon ...
> So I would not be surprised if you hear a change with time; but I don't think it is a hardware issue. That said, the DAC does sound slightly warmer after being on for ten minutes...
> As to your comments about HD recording yes the WTA filter will also improve those. This is because 192k as a format is still no where near accurate enough; just hear a 768 k recording! These sound very different to a 192k...



Dear Rob, many thanks for your insightful (as always) comments - these are really helpful. Basically then, there may be a hardware "burn in" for other types of equipment, but for the Qutest we should allow a slight warm up period, and then some time to re-tune our brains 

I'm not sure I can persuade the record companies to record at 768 k - but it would be nice if they upped their game (most classical recording companies seem to regard 24-bit/96 kHz as their ultimate!).


----------



## Mrandrade (May 3, 2018)

Dear friends,
I think there is no doubt about the "burning" time of our brain ... But I also know that when it happens to listen to a system that I have never heard before, to feel immediately whether I like the sound or not, before having even "burned" the brain!
In the case of qutest, when I heard it on my system replacing Qute HD, I have to confess that I did not like it. The sound was aggressive, tiring and the sound stage disorganized. I could not hear records that I like very much and that I know well.
So, quite disappointed I decided to let it work 3 days in a row receiving music from the streamer and sending it to an amp of headphones ...
When I came back to listen on my system it was only for 1 hour and although better, I missed my Qute HD that I had already sold.
I returned to deoxa it to work more 4 days in a row before I heard it again, and the difference was remarkable ... Now I knew how to listen to music on my system.

All this to say that in my case did not happen practically "brain burning" ...

I can conclude that the burning that existed was indeed Qutest.

From here on, I feel like I'm getting better and better, so I think it's my brain to burn ...

I note that before having Qutest I used the Qute HD that I bought used and I also tried a used Hugo. In these two cases I liked them as soon as I heard them


----------



## Eddie O

Mrandrade said:


> Dear friends,
> I think there is no doubt about the "burning" time of our brain ... But I also know that when it happens to listen to a system that I have never heard before, to feel immediately whether I like the sound or not, before having even "burned" the brain!
> In the case of qutest, when I heard it on my system replacing Qute HD, I have to confess that I did not like it. The sound was aggressive, tiring and the sound stage disorganized. I could not hear records that I like very much and that I know well.
> So, quite disappointed I decided to let it work 3 days in a row receiving music from the streamer and sending it to an amp of headphones ...
> ...



@Rob Watts cum suis, 

It’s great to have the possibility to get information strait from the developer. I absolutely lack the technical education to discuss the qualities of the Qutest, but mine really sounded harsh and bright when I first heard it. High notes on close recorded piano and violin really hurt my ears. Some of my favorite tracks where very unpleasant to listen to. I can not imagine that this can be fully adjusted by psychological adaption. 

greetings,

Eddie


----------



## Triode User

Mrandrade said:


> Dear friends,
> I think there is no doubt about the "burning" time of our brain ... But I also know that when it happens to listen to a system that I have never heard before, to feel immediately whether I like the sound or not, before having even "burned" the brain!
> In the case of qutest, when I heard it on my system replacing Qute HD, I have to confess that I did not like it. The sound was aggressive, tiring and the sound stage disorganized. I could not hear records that I like very much and that I know well.
> So, quite disappointed I decided to let it work 3 days in a row receiving music from the streamer and sending it to an amp of headphones ...
> ...



I’m glad that you are getting to like your Qurest. 

However I’m not sure that it is essential to actually listen to the Qutest all the time for brain burn in to happen. Like with all things, the brain is working and learning in between sessions. I expect that the brain remembers the listening to Qutest and is thinking about that sound until the next lessening session in which it then begins to pick out bits of music it likes as opposed to bits that are different to the previous dac you had. 

Obviously this is prime ymmv territory but RW does seem clear that his DACs do not alter with burn it. 

Anyway, none of this matters as long as you are happy with your dac.


----------



## Hummer25

I will now get the chance to listen to the Qutest in my system with an InnuOS Zen so it's going to be an interesting weekend!


----------



## soares

Most of my equpment required burning time, including my Dac's with the exception of the iFi nano BL. Lookind forward to receiving my new Qutest.


----------



## stickboy85

Hummer25 said:


> I will now get the chance to listen to the Qutest in my system with an InnuOS Zen so it's going to be an interesting weekend!



Would very much like to hear your thoughts on this. I'm planning on getting a Zen/Zenith and Qutest to go with my wireless KEF LS50.


----------



## flacre

stickboy85 said:


> Would very much like to hear your thoughts on this. I'm planning on getting a Zen/Zenith and Qutest to go with my wireless KEF LS50.



Maybe I’m out to lunch, but since the wireless LS50s have built in DACs which as far as I know cannot be bypassed, won’t you just be listening to the DACs in the speakers instead of the Qutest?


----------



## stickboy85

flacre said:


> Maybe I’m out to lunch, but since the wireless LS50s have built in DACs which as far as I know cannot be bypassed, won’t you just be listening to the DACs in the speakers instead of the Qutest?



You can bypass the KEF DAC.


----------



## flacre

stickboy85 said:


> You can bypass the KEF DAC.



Are you sure? Here's what Darko said in his review of the LS50 wireless:

“Purists should be made aware that all incoming analogue signals are instantly digitised to 24bit/192kHz PCM; how else would the signal be split and the left channel handed over to the other loudspeaker via Ethernet?”


----------



## stickboy85

flacre said:


> Are you sure? Here's what Darko said in his review of the LS50 wireless:
> 
> “Purists should be made aware that all incoming analogue signals are instantly digitised to 24bit/192kHz PCM; how else would the signal be split and the left channel handed over to the other loudspeaker via Ethernet?”



Yes. Theres a follow up article on DARKO that mentions how the AD/DA conversion is very transparent and there's also threads on other websites about external dacs being used. 
I personally have used the MOJO, bluesound node 2 and meridian explorer 2 dacs with the KEFs and they all sound different as you would expect.
Sorry for off topic.


----------



## flacre

stickboy85 said:


> Yes. Theres a follow up article on DARKO that mentions how the AD/DA conversion is very transparent and there's also threads on other websites about external dacs being used.
> I personally have used the MOJO, bluesound node 2 and meridian explorer 2 dacs with the KEFs and they all sound different as you would expect.
> Sorry for off topic.



Thanks and my apologies for going off topic as well.


----------



## zek4u

Conversion to digital for vinyl just seems wrong but Darko doesn’t seem to mind. That and the 3.5mm input and no way to integrate headphones kept me with seperates and Chord.  Think my Harbeths with the 2qute has better tonality, timbre, etc.  Hugo 2 or Qutest on the way soon.


----------



## Matez

JWahl said:


> I got mine in today.  I'm waiting to pass any serious judgements, but so far it's positive.  The Qutest feels very substantial and looks even better in person.  Very classy.  For today though, I'm stuck using it only with the iCan SE.  I forgot that I don't have any spare RCA cables so I had to order some more and they should be here tomorrow.  I've been using a Y-cable with the Mojo, which I can use with the 3.5mm input on the iCan for the time being.  I'm more looking forward to trying the Qutest with the Massdrop CTH when the cables arrive tomorrow.  I preferred the CTH of the iCan with the Mojo, so I suspect it may be the same with the Qutest.
> 
> I also made the mistake of using it first with the iUSB, then going back to the stock supply.  I definitely prefer the iUSB with it.  It seems to give a little more clarity and resolution that pushes it closer to what I remember the Dave sounding like.
> 
> Compared to the Mojo, it's a noticeable improvement.  Better bass definition, separation, air, and dynamics.  The more prominent treble on the Qutest will require some adjustment, but I've found the green filter to help tame that a bit.  Again, very early impressions from about 3 or so hours of listening.  More will come later.



Nice impressions. In general would you say that Qutest sounds more substantial and less ethereal in comparison to Mojo?


----------



## jayz (May 4, 2018)

zek4u said:


> Conversion to digital for vinyl just seems wrong but Darko doesn’t seem to mind. That and the 3.5mm input and no way to integrate headphones kept me with seperates and Chord.  Think my Harbeths with the 2qute has better tonality, timbre, etc.  Hugo 2 or Qutest on the way soon.



The issue with professional reviews is that they rarely talk in absolute terms. With LS50, Darko is probably comparing against other similar speakers i.e. its immediate competition. 

Also have to say I absolutely like active speakers but for some reason I hear a metallic resonance with KEF uniq drivers affecting both the top-end and upper mids but I know the LS50s in particular is a success story for KEF.


----------



## Skampmeister

Never understood to hype around the LS50, never been a fan.


----------



## Clemmaster

stickboy85 said:


> You can bypass the KEF DAC.


No, you can't.

Using external DAC does not bypass the internal DAC, the analog signal first goes through an ADC and is digitized at high sampling rate, for minimum loss of fidelity.


----------



## stickboy85

Well we can't all be wrong...

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/kef-ls50-wireless-internal-vs-external-dac


----------



## JWahl (May 4, 2018)

Matez said:


> Nice impressions. In general would you say that Qutest sounds more substantial and less ethereal in comparison to Mojo?



Honestly, I'm finding the Qutest to be more ethereal and airy overall, but that characteristic can be tweaked slightly with the filter options.  I personally found the Mojo to lean a bit warm or mid-range centered without being overly mushy.  With the orange and red filters, it sounds a little like a gutsier Mojo but loses some of the superior transient attacks of the white and green filters.  I never really found the Mojo to be particularly airy myself, at least in comparison to the Schiit Gungnir MB and Yggdrasil I owned previously.  It could be that the ethereal quality of the Mojo you describe is the weakness in the lower bass, on which the Qutest does improve, but the more prominent Treble of the Qutest makes it airier, with more defined textures on instruments which rely on high frequency harmonics for texture (think snare drums, or violins).

I'm liking it more as I listen, especially now that I've had some time using the Massdrop CTH with it.  I think this will be my "Goldilocks" DAC for awhile.  Is it perfect? No.  It doesn't have the authoritative deep bass of the Schiit multibits I've owned, though bass depth and impact is improved from the Mojo.  What does seem counter-intuitive though, is that despite the more ethereal character of the Qutest, the transient response allows it to portray rhythmic nuances in music very well.  I'd say that the transient response is the biggest improvement I notice over the Mojo.  Lots of Head bobbing and toe tapping going on.  At least some of that is the CTH, but that aspect seems even better with the Qutest than the Mojo.  This is part of why I waited for the Qutest over the Hugo 2.  I sometimes prefer the character that certain amps add.

I really like it as a total package, considering what it does relative to its physical size.  The Yggdrasil sounds great, but is also physically massive for a desktop setup.  It all fits nicely on this desktop shelf I bought.  The iUSB is on the very bottom, with my overkill RF ferrite choke on the power cable with 4 turns.




You'll have to forgive the weird fish-eye effect.  Only the wide-angle camera on my phone is working correctly at the moment. 

The only unfortunate thing is that I can't test it with my Elear since the driver is busted and I'm waiting on an RMA from my dealer.  Impressions are only with my modded HD-650 (removed spider with some strategic sorbothane peices applied)

I'm most likely going to stick with this for awhile.  Though, I might look into the Liquid Platinum or Lyr 3 for amp upgrades in the future, or the Clear for headphone upgrades.  I really need to get out to another meet in the future.


----------



## Skampmeister

JWahl said:


> Is it perfect?



Do let us know when you find one that is indeed, perfect


----------



## JWahl

Skampmeister said:


> Do let us know when you find one that is indeed, perfect


Ha, for sure.  In all seriousness though, my greater point is that everything has some kind of compromises.  The sound of the Yggdrasil is fairly close to "perfect" for my taste, but as I said, it's physically massive, and a little pricey.  The Dave probably gets closer to sonic perfection, but its compromise is that most people will never be able to afford one.  For me, the Qutest is an ideal set of compromises.  It's expensive but still attainable.  It's compact.  It's sound is, or get's really close to what I would describe as summit-fi (I'm still working that out).

On that latter point, I intend to do some more listening next week using the stock power supply so I can get a more accurate picture of baseline capabilities.  I don't want to overstate what I'm hearing because of the tweaks.  I'm also continuing to let it run-in in case that makes any difference.  If anything though, it may be my CTH that is still "burning-in" since it has a tube and some electrolytic caps.


----------



## Zzt231gr (May 5, 2018)

Greetings from Greece!

First post and a few days lurker of this thread.

I am about to buy a dac,being between Gumby and Qutest.Sound quality is the factor and build quality comes second.

JWahl,your answer will help me tremendously ;IIRC you are stating that Qutest is almost the same in sound quality as Yggy?Quality wise comparison?


----------



## JWahl

Zzt231gr said:


> Greetings from Greece!
> 
> First post and a few days lurker of this thread.
> 
> ...




I'm hesitant to make a direct comparison with the Yggy, because it's been over 2 years since I owned it, and when I did it was with different amp and headphones.  That being said, on sound alone, I'd probably still prefer the Yggy slightly.  I think the Yggy is more sonically well-rounded.  The Gumby is a little different because it has a warmer overall signature than both, but the strength that I find with the Gumby is that its very well rounded and doesn't really do anything "wrong" per se.  It's a safe choice in regard to equipment pairing.  Both of the Schiit DACs tend to have better bass depth and detail, but that's one of their strengths.  Depending on a person's tastes or other equipment, they may find the Qutest or even the Yggy to be too bright or aggressive, though I don't think that's the case myself.

The other reason I wanted to wait a bit longer before making more definitive statements, is the difference with the stock supply, and using the iUSB.  I went back to the stock a second time today.  While we're well into diminishing returns on DACs, I'm currently thinking that if I did not have the iUSB, I might have ended up deciding to sell the Qutest.  It is a somewhat subtle difference, but enough to push the Qutest into what I would consider to be the next tier up.  EU prices are of course a different value proposition, but in USD I'd probably be willing to pay no more than $1500 for Qutest in stock form.  With the iUSB (at $200) I think it is just worth the money together ($2100 U.S. combined retail).  Given the EU prices on Schiit products, the Qutest  + iUSB or similar would probably be a better value.

I realize that is kind of bold statement, which is why I wanted to wait a little longer to say for sure, but that is how I'm leaning right now.  The iUSB isn't a night and day difference, but it's just enough to bring out some of qualities that I expect from a truly high-end DAC.  Without it, the Qutest seems a bit flatter in soundstage presentation, with less distinct microdynamics, and a certain "grayish" haze going on with the texture and timbre range of the treble.  Please note however, that my house is likely a mess of RFI, with lots of cell phones, tablets, computers, and other wifi connected devices, which the iUSB likely cleans up on both the USB power and signal lines for the Qutest.  Less polluted homes may fair better.


----------



## wasupdog

if i'm not mistaken you can use a schiit eitr which is the same concept as the iusb?  I saw that some people were using it with a mojo and had slight but noticeable improvements.  that was definitely the case using it with my yggy.


----------



## JWahl

wasupdog said:


> if i'm not mistaken you can use a schiit eitr which is the same concept as the iusb?  I saw that some people were using it with a mojo and had slight but noticeable improvements.  that was definitely the case using it with my yggy.



Sort of.  The Eitr is a USB to SPDIF converter, although an effective one from what I've read.  With the Qutest, the DAC power would still be from its 5V micro USB port if using the Eitr.  I have the power-only and signal outputs of the iUSB feeding the power and signal inputs on the Qutest separately.


----------



## Zzt231gr

JWahl said:


> I'm hesitant to make a direct comparison with the Yggy, because it's been over 2 years since I owned it, and when I did it was with different amp and headphones.  That being said, on sound alone, I'd probably still prefer the Yggy slightly.  I think the Yggy is more sonically well-rounded.  The Gumby is a little different because it has a warmer overall signature than both, but the strength that I find with the Gumby is that its very well rounded and doesn't really do anything "wrong" per se.  It's a safe choice in regard to equipment pairing.  Both of the Schiit DACs tend to have better bass depth and detail, but that's one of their strengths.  Depending on a person's tastes or other equipment, they may find the Qutest or even the Yggy to be too bright or aggressive, though I don't think that's the case myself.
> 
> The other reason I wanted to wait a bit longer before making more definitive statements, is the difference with the stock supply, and using the iUSB.  I went back to the stock a second time today.  While we're well into diminishing returns on DACs, I'm currently thinking that if I did not have the iUSB, I might have ended up deciding to sell the Qutest.  It is a somewhat subtle difference, but enough to push the Qutest into what I would consider to be the next tier up.  EU prices are of course a different value proposition, but in USD I'd probably be willing to pay no more than $1500 for Qutest in stock form.  With the iUSB (at $200) I think it is just worth the money together ($2100 U.S. combined retail).  Given the EU prices on Schiit products, the Qutest  + iUSB or similar would probably be a better value.
> 
> I realize that is kind of bold statement, which is why I wanted to wait a little longer to say for sure, but that is how I'm leaning right now.  The iUSB isn't a night and day difference, but it's just enough to bring out some of qualities that I expect from a truly high-end DAC.  Without it, the Qutest seems a bit flatter in soundstage presentation, with less distinct microdynamics, and a certain "grayish" haze going on with the texture and timbre range of the treble.  Please note however, that my house is likely a mess of RFI, with lots of cell phones, tablets, computers, and other wifi connected devices, which the iUSB likely cleans up on both the USB power and signal lines for the Qutest.  Less polluted homes may fair better.



Thank you for your detailed answer.But to be clear,between Qutest and Gungnir Multibit,which one do you find as an overall sonic  winner?Bear in mind that I will be feeding the dac via a transport and I will be listening through speakers-only.

Also,my inhouse power is pretty clean.But are you saying Mr Watts is wrong for declaring that aftermarket PSUs don't make a difference ?


----------



## Hummer25

Qutest up and running last night. This was used with a Laptop running Audirvana. It is certainly a solid well engineered DAC and set up was a very straightforward. Although it has a strange ergonomic interface it is simple to  learn and  use. It was easily found by the various front end systems I was using and technically performed very well. The solid build quality helps with plugging cables in and and out but this is still a very small unit which means rather than just plugging stuff in you tend to pick the unit up and connect cables which makes it a bit like a portable device. you could certainly have this on your desk top which is useful.

Having listened to DAVE and m-scaler a lot, the Qutest had a lot to live up to as DAVE is my benchmark for how digital audio should be handled and sound. The Qutest is not DAVE but its DNA is similar. It gets you a long way up the ladder to DAVE so i would say it gives you 75% of DAVEs performance but with an m-scaler this could be closer?

Overall impressions. This is a smooth sounding but detailed DAC. Vocals sound natural and instruments have fairly good tonal quality. Some of the top end does sound a little subdued but in a good way. Soundstage  is reasonably extended and has some depth but certainly not in DAVE league. I can concur with JWahl that soundstage can sound a little flat, I think its a bit 2D rather than 3D. I also noticed when playing music with a complex mix it seemed to highlight either the vocals or the instruments but not both at the same time, your attention was drawn to one or the other. I had a play with the filters but felt in my system they all took something away rather than added so left in on the neutral filter. One more overall impression was how there seemed to be an homogenous handling of whatever material I played through the Qutest. Yes there were distinctions between MP3 (Handled very well), CD quality and 24bit recordings but there was a certain signature to the sound? This may have been how Audirvana sounds rather than the DAC? 

These first impressions were using my Laptop, later I will use a different system with a music server. I will post up my impressions of this set up with Qutest later. However I was very impressed with the performance the Qutest gave with the Laptop and would very much recommend it as a DAC as it allowed you to listen to music in a non fatiguing way for long periods of time. It gave very good insight into the recordings but I felt I could do with just a little more bite and acoustic information. This is probably because mentally I am comparing it with DAVE which is a little unfair. 

Just a last thought, compared to HUGO it is a big leap and easily out performs it with a much more relaxed and spacious performance. Qutest sounds more natural and analogue compared to HUGO and does not have any digital sounding artefacts, it sounds smoother and closer to analogue than digital which in my book is very good.


----------



## JWahl (May 6, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you for your detailed answer.But to be clear,between Qutest and Gungnir Multibit,which one do you find as an overall sonic  winner?Bear in mind that I will be feeding the dac via a transport and I will be listening through speakers-only.
> 
> Also,my inhouse power is pretty clean.But are you saying Mr Watts is wrong for declaring that aftermarket PSUs don't make a difference ?



That's tough to say to be honest, and may depend more on your personal preference.  I think the Qutest would give more air and maybe a little more micro-detail.  The Gungnir MB would be warmer, more solid, and extend further in the low frequencies with more authority.

I consider them in a similar tier, though tonally different.  The problem is that with the Gungnir MB, I also had a better amp.  I was using a maxed out Torpedo III amp which is a DIY tube-hybrid with Cinemag output transformers.  I had sold the Torpedo III and Gungnir about the same time, but bought the Torpedo III back later on and used it for a while with the Mojo.  I sold the Torpedo III again to help fund the Qutest purchase.  The CTH I'm using is much more affordable ($250).  I can say I prefer the CTH + Qutest over the Torpedo III + Mojo.  I _might_ prefer the Torpedo III + Gungnir MB to the CTH + Qutest, but it's still been over year, so sometimes long term sonic memory is less reliable.  I would have loved to try the Torpedo III + Qutest, but I couldn't justify the expense of both together.  I did feel like the Mojo was bottlenecking the Torpedo III, having heard it with the Gungnir MB.  The Qutest feels less bottlenecked with the CTH, but I'm sure it could go farther with a better amp.  Maybe a more logical comparison would be that before the Torpedo III, I used the Schiit Valhalla 2 with the Gungnir MB and HD-650, which is similarly priced to the CTH.  I feel more comfortable saying that I prefer the CTH + Qutest to the Valhalla 2 + Gungnir MB.

I can't speak about performance with speakers though, as I'm listening strictly with headphones.

As far as the power supply thing.  I don't think Rob Watts is wrong necessarily.  I don't think the Qutest needs an overkill linear power supply like some have suggested with the 2Qute.  I do think it benefits from RFI filtering.  And his testing area may not be heavily polluted with RFI.  He has explained that he has included additional RFI filtering in the Qutest, which I'm sure does help some.  I'm studying to be an EE myself, so I do try to find rational explanations for what I hear.  However, it's also engineered to a price point.  More aggressive filtering might add more production cost and R&D time expense.  Also, they have to be careful to distinguish it from the DAVE sufficiently, or they risk cannibalizing sales of their higher end products.


----------



## plsvn

JWahl said:


> The Gungnir MB would be warmer, more solid, and extend further in the low frequencies with more authority



plenty of deep, perfectly controlled, bass here from the Qutest, a 2A3 SET power amplifier and Klipsch Cornwall (15" woofer usually pretty hard to tame )


----------



## JWahl

plsvn said:


> plenty of deep, perfectly controlled, bass here from the Qutest, a 2A3 SET power amplifier and Klipsch Cornwall (15" woofer usually pretty hard to tame )



I'm sure it does.  I know the purists may scoff at tubes, but I also like the touch of tone and richness the CTH adds compared to the iCan SE.

My biggest complaint right now is that I'm being seriously distracted from finishing studying for my Calculus 2 final exam tomorrow.


----------



## miketlse

JWahl said:


> I'm sure it does.  I know the purists may scoff at tubes, but I also like the touch of tone and richness the CTH adds compared to the iCan SE.
> 
> My biggest complaint right now is that I'm being seriously distracted from finishing studying for my Calculus 2 final exam tomorrow.


Good luck with your studies.
Replying to @plsvn the laws of physics will always dictate that the greater the diameter of your woofer, the deeper the bass notes that your speakers can reproduce.
After that, I think many of us are on a journey trying to reproduce the bass notes that we experience sitting 1m away from the double-bass, to a domestic setting.
At the moment, after sitting and watching friends play a double bass, I suspect that the 'horizontal' feeling of your body vibrating during the low bass notes may be hard to reproduce within a domestic setting.
But it is an interesting journey, all the same.
I recognise that sitting 1m away from the double bass player, meant that some conversations with friends across a table were difficult because of the noise levels, so maybe we can listen to the music or pursue a conversation.
Trying to achieve the ultimate compromise is a good challenge.


----------



## Zzt231gr (May 6, 2018)

JWahl said:


> That's tough to say to be honest, and may depend more on your personal preference.  I think the Qutest would give more air and maybe a little more micro-detail.  The Gungnir MB would be warmer, more solid, and extend further in the low frequencies with more authority.
> 
> I consider them in a similar tier, though tonally different.  The problem is that with the Gungnir MB, I also had a better amp.  I was using a maxed out Torpedo III amp which is a DIY tube-hybrid with Cinemag output transformers.  I had sold the Torpedo III and Gungnir about the same time, but bought the Torpedo III back later on and used it for a while with the Mojo.  I sold the Torpedo III again to help fund the Qutest purchase.  The CTH I'm using is much more affordable ($250).  I can say I prefer the CTH + Qutest over the Torpedo III + Mojo.  I _might_ prefer the Torpedo III + Gungnir MB to the CTH + Qutest, but it's still been over year, so sometimes long term sonic memory is less reliable.  I would have loved to try the Torpedo III + Qutest, but I couldn't justify the expense of both together.  I did feel like the Mojo was bottlenecking the Torpedo III, having heard it with the Gungnir MB.  The Qutest feels less bottlenecked with the CTH, but I'm sure it could go farther with a better amp.  Maybe a more logical comparison would be that before the Torpedo III, I used the Schiit Valhalla 2 with the Gungnir MB and HD-650, which is similarly priced to the CTH.  I feel more comfortable saying that I prefer the CTH + Qutest to the Valhalla 2 + Gungnir MB.
> 
> ...


I am looking for a transparent dac,so I think Qutest is the way to go.Also,bass-if lacking a little-can be adjusted through careful speaker placement,but detail not.I am an EE also(Ithink you mean electrical engineer).


plsvn said:


> plenty of deep, perfectly controlled, bass here from the Qutest, a 2A3 SET power amplifier and Klipsch Cornwall (15" woofer usually pretty hard to tame )


Well,those are pretty good news!

Also,the price of these 2 dacs is identical for me to buy in Greece .


----------



## jayz

plsvn said:


> plenty of deep, perfectly controlled, bass here from the Qutest



Totally agree. 

A speaker designer once said he had a lifelong obsession to reach the limits of quality bass reproduction and so he went to great lengths to source the best components, the most innert cabinet possible and lightening fast bass servo circuitry with room correction feedback only to realise at the end that hyper accurate bass did not sound like bass at all - at least not to a majority of audio enthusiasts.


----------



## JWahl (May 6, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> I am looking for a transparent dac,so I think Qutest is the way to go.Also,bass-if lacking a little-can be adjusted through careful speaker placement,but detail not.I am an EE also(Ithink you mean electrical engineer).
> 
> Well,those are pretty good news!
> 
> Also,the price of these 2 dacs is identical for me to buy in Greece .



In that case, the Qutest would likely best suit your needs.  And yes, Electrical Engineering.



miketlse said:


> Good luck with your studies.



Thank you.  Of course, the distraction is a bit tongue-in-cheek meaning that I'm enjoying listening very much.  It's a very engaging listen that doesn't lend itself to passive background listening.


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> I am looking for a transparent dac,so I think Qutest is the way to go.Also,bass-if lacking a little-can be adjusted through careful speaker placement,but detail not.I am an EE also(Ithink you mean electrical engineer).
> 
> Well,those are pretty good news!
> 
> Also,the price of these 2 dacs is identical for me to buy in Greece .


I don't have a Qutest, but I was chasing the low bass notes.
I have a Hugo 2, and i changed from a Monitor Audio Silver speaker, to a Focal Aria 946 speaker.
This did improve the bass note reproduction. I sat 1m away from a friend playing the double bass at a gig, and it was so strange that I felt my body vibrating horizontally to the bass notes.
This has left me in the position where my speakers can adequately reproduce most music, but maybe fail under exacting circumstances.
It is not a showstopper for me, so I will continue to investigate during the musical festivals this Summer, and it is an interesting topic to debate whether a sub-woofer is necessary. 
Chord dacs are enabling us to explore these topics.


----------



## miketlse

JWahl said:


> In that case, the Qutest would likely best suit your needs.  And yes, Electrical Engineering.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  Of course, the distraction is a bit tongue-in-cheek meaning that I'm enjoying listening very much.  It's a very engaging listen that doesn't lend itself to passive background listening.


Always remember that lecturers teach you the theory.
The important part is you learning to apply the theory in real world situations.
head-fi feedback provides many examples where theory was inexactly designed into products.


----------



## Zzt231gr

JWahl said:


> My biggest complaint right now is that I'm being seriously distracted from finishing studying for my Calculus 2 final exam tomorrow.


Good luck my friend .



miketlse said:


> I don't have a Qutest, but I was chasing the low bass notes.
> I have a Hugo 2, and i changed from a Monitor Audio Silver speaker, to a Focal Aria 946 speaker.
> This did improve the bass note reproduction. I sat 1m away from a friend playing the double bass at a gig, and it was so strange that I felt my body vibrating horizontally to the bass notes.
> This has left me in the position where my speakers can adequately reproduce most music, but maybe fail under exacting circumstances.
> ...


Proper speaker placement will give you plenty of deep bass and accurate reproduction.Study room modes if you haven't.Happy original owner of Epos M15 here!


----------



## jayz

miketlse said:


> I sat 1m away from a friend playing the double bass at a gig, and it was so strange that I felt my body vibrating horizontally to the bass notes.
> This has left me in the position where my speakers can adequately reproduce most music, but maybe fail under exacting circumstances.
> It is not a showstopper for me, so I will continue to investigate during the musical festivals this Summer, and it is an interesting topic to debate whether a sub-woofer is necessary.



Have you tried tactile transducers? I can go to great lengths on these topics but suffice to say a properly setup arrangement can get you closer to the realism of listening to a live bass player. The difference is while a subwoofer excites air, a tactile setup supplements a sub with vibration. I had the buttkicker concert https://thebuttkicker.com/concert/ fixed to my sofa for a while and driven by its matching 1000n amp. These are actually serious professional grade equipment used by musicians for monitoring but can be used in domestic audio systems to get that feeling of  immediacy and energy felt in a live performance.

However, as with most things in audio, everything is a compromise. In my case I had to let go off the tactile side and improve on my subwoofer integration. I had to ensure that the sub could keep up with the active speakers so any old sub could not do that. Also as someone mentioned, the bass region is heavily influenced by room accoustics so that needs to considered. Full room treatment is the ideal option but again, the compromise I had to settle for was a combination of light room treatment plus active room accoustics correction using a device called antimode. This comes with a calibration mic and performs a self calibration run to detect room nodes and phase anomalies and at the end of calibration it stores the correction settings. So its not just about amplitude correction. Anyway the result is that the sub is not really audible and it sounds as the main speakers suddenly became flat full range. Btw if you are looking for a sub that can do music without bloat, have a read about rhythmic audio subs - their forums are rich with information.


----------



## miketlse

jayz said:


> Have you tried tactile transducers? I can go to great lengths on these topics but suffice to say a properly setup arrangement can get you closer to the realism of listening to a live bass player. The difference is while a subwoofer excites air, a tactile setup supplements a sub with vibration. I had the buttkicker concert https://thebuttkicker.com/concert/ fixed to my sofa for a while and driven by its matching 1000n amp. These are actually serious professional grade equipment used by musicians for monitoring but can be used in domestic audio systems to get that feeling of  immediacy and energy felt in a live performance.
> 
> However, as with most things in audio, everything is a compromise. In my case I had to let go off the tactile side and improve on my subwoofer integration. I had to ensure that the sub could keep up with the active speakers so any old sub could not do that. Also as someone mentioned, the bass region is heavily influenced by room accoustics so that needs to considered. Full room treatment is the ideal option but again, the compromise I had to settle for was a combination of light room treatment plus active room accoustics correction using a device called antimode. This comes with a calibration mic and performs a self calibration run to detect room nodes and phase anomalies and at the end of calibration it stores the correction settings. So its not just about amplitude correction. Anyway the result is that the sub is not really audible and it sounds as the main speakers suddenly became flat full range. Btw if you are looking for a sub that can do music without bloat, have a read about rhythmic audio subs - their forums are rich with information.


Yes you are right that everything is a compromise.


----------



## AlexB73

I like bass reproduction of 15 inch woofer vintage speakers more than modern tower speakers with number of small woofers. 
For ellectronics and rock music JBL L300 bass is great.
For accoustic music Altec 515 bass drivers , Altec 604 and Tannoy cooxial are excellent.


----------



## flyte3333 (May 6, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> @Mrandrade asked me via a PM what bank I used, so I got it out of my bag. It is actually 85W/h, and is Poweradd Pilot pro 2. I have had a number of banks before, this is the best so far as it is reliable and seems well made.



Nice, I see this has 9V/12V/19V DC outputs.

I'm hoping the MScaler takes one these Vdc inputs...

Then I'd just need to feed the MScaler with a TOSlink or battery powered USB source and there's no leakage currents coming into the DAC.

And no need for a single ferrite anywhere.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Anyone here that bought this dac in Greece?I can't seem to find an official dealer ...


----------



## plsvn

Zzt231gr said:


> Anyone here that bought this dac in Greece?I can't seem to find an official dealer ...



tried using this: https://chordelectronics.co.uk/locate-dealer/ ?
I did and found one in Athens


----------



## Zzt231gr

plsvn said:


> tried using this: https://chordelectronics.co.uk/locate-dealer/ ?
> I did and found one in Athens


Thanks but I already tried and the website directs me to Cyprus .I am waiting for an answer from Chord .


----------



## plsvn (May 7, 2018)

weird, as I just tried once more and...


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Click where it says website and you'll see.It seems weird to me,too!


----------



## plsvn (May 7, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> ^^Click where it says website and you'll see.It seems weird to me,too!



oh, I see: weird indeed 

might just be something wrong with the embedded URL or Cyprus might be the "fiscal" location: try calling or sending a mail


----------



## Matez

JWahl said:


> Honestly, I'm finding the Qutest to be more ethereal and airy overall, but that characteristic can be tweaked slightly with the filter options.  I personally found the Mojo to lean a bit warm or mid-range centered without being overly mushy.  With the orange and red filters, it sounds a little like a gutsier Mojo but loses some of the superior transient attacks of the white and green filters.  I never really found the Mojo to be particularly airy myself, at least in comparison to the Schiit Gungnir MB and Yggdrasil I owned previously.  It could be that the ethereal quality of the Mojo you describe is the weakness in the lower bass, on which the Qutest does improve, but the more prominent Treble of the Qutest makes it airier, with more defined textures on instruments which rely on high frequency harmonics for texture (think snare drums, or violins).
> 
> I'm liking it more as I listen, especially now that I've had some time using the Massdrop CTH with it.  I think this will be my "Goldilocks" DAC for awhile.  Is it perfect? No.  It doesn't have the authoritative deep bass of the Schiit multibits I've owned, though bass depth and impact is improved from the Mojo.  What does seem counter-intuitive though, is that despite the more ethereal character of the Qutest, the transient response allows it to portray rhythmic nuances in music very well.  I'd say that the transient response is the biggest improvement I notice over the Mojo.  Lots of Head bobbing and toe tapping going on.  At least some of that is the CTH, but that aspect seems even better with the Qutest than the Mojo.  This is part of why I waited for the Qutest over the Hugo 2.  I sometimes prefer the character that certain amps add.
> 
> ...



Great impressions, thanks! Fish-eye effect is forgiven


----------



## musicman59

plsvn said:


> plenty of deep, perfectly controlled, bass here from the Qutest, a 2A3 SET power amplifier and Klipsch Cornwall (15" woofer usually pretty hard to tame )


I love the Klipsch Cornwall. IMO the best sounding Klipsch speaker because their sound is much more balanced. I owned them back in the early 90s and had the chance to buy any of the Klipsch models. I loved the design of the Belle, really beautiful but that one and the K-Horn were to bright for my taste so I went for the Cornwall. After all these years I still miss them and Even thinking about buying a pair again...


----------



## Hummer25 (May 7, 2018)

Just tried Qutest with InnuOS  Zen Mini mk2 server and many of my observations regarding the Qutest have changed. With the Macbook pro running Audirvana I felt slightly detached from the performance/music and the soundstage was a bit flat. I also noticed a lack of dynamics and bass. However with the InnuOS Zen things have changed considerably. The soundstage now has greater width and lots more depth, dynamics and detail have increased substantially. Tonal quality and bass has improved, in particular the bass is now quite muscular. i am running the Qutest into an all valve preamp with a very nice valve line stage and the match seems perfect. The difference between the Macbook and InnuOS is huge which just goes to show you need a good front end feeding the DAC.

Vocals are very palpable and real with a great presence in the room. The Qutest, like DAVE is smooth sounding and very analogue in its presentation with very little remaining to remind you are listening to digital audio. For the money Qutest is very good value as I feel it gives me 75-80% of DAVE. Where it looses out is on soundstage /, depth and micro nuances in the music and the sheer gravity and wallop DAVE can produce in the bottom end. However in my system Qutest gives me as much as I could want and on well mastered material it really delivers the goods.

I use my vinyl rig as a benchmark and honestly Qutest with the InnuOS Zen was such a close match on some recordings I could find very little difference between the two, that is how analogue it sounds. With top end information the Qutest with the Zen now sounds much more detailed. I was astonished switching between the Macbook into Qutest and the InnuOS with a recording of Diane Krall called Temptation, her voice took on massive amounts more of detail and nuances and the dynamics of the recording had a real presence and gravity. The piano had a lot more weight and the whole performance sounded more natural and real as if your were in the room with the performers.

So my opinion of the Qutest has vastly improved just by switching from FBA via the Macbook to an InnuOS server. Just goes to show how important it is to feed your DAC the right material.

I must just add my Chord Qutest had already been run in so i noticed no harshness or a bright top end as some have found. however I am running it through an all valve preamp and Hybrid OTL power amp. Transparency is therefore very high!


----------



## maxh22

Hummer25 said:


> Just tried Qutest with InnuOS  Zen Mini mk2 server and many of my observations regarding the Qutest have changed. With the Macbook pro running Audirvana I felt slightly detached from the performance/music and the soundstage was a bit flat. I also noticed a lack of dynamics and bass. However with the InnuOS Zen things have changed considerably. The soundstage now has greater width and lots more depth, dynamics and detail have increased substantially. Tonal quality and bass has improved, in particular the bass is now quite muscular. i am running the Qutest into an all valve preamp with a very nice valve line stage and the match seems perfect. The difference between the Macbook and InnuOS is huge which just goes to show you need a good front end feeding the DAC.
> 
> Vocals are very palpable and real with a great presence in the room. The Qutest, like DAVE is smooth sounding and very analogue in its presentation with very little remaining to remind you are listening to digital audio. For the money Qutest is very good value as I feel it gives me 75-80% of DAVE. Where it looses out is on soundstage /, depth and micro nuances in the music and the sheer gravity and wallop DAVE can produce in the bottom end. However in my system Qutest gives me as much as I could want and on well mastered material it really delivers the goods.
> 
> ...



Sounds like you have achieved excellent results, reading your post reminded me of my own experience when comparing optical from my MSI laptop versus my V20 or Asus Zenbook. The MSI via optical has a much more muscular sound with greater depth and width. It's just too bad they don't have a server with toslink outputs so you could compare the two. I was looking at this server at one point because I have some CD's I want to play from time to time.


----------



## Rhinomyte76

Question re: Variable output voltage setting:

My qutest arrives in 2 days.  Super pumped, but I don't really understand the variable output voltage and the effect that this will have.  I will be running the qutest into an amp and sound kenzie headphone amp which then goes directly into headphones.  Can anyone give me any suggestions or things I should consider in setting the variable output voltage?  Thanks!!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hummer,that was awesome.You can't have good sounding music if even one piece of your link doesn't deliver!


Rhinomyte76 said:


> Question re: Variable output voltage setting:
> 
> My qutest arrives in 2 days.  Super pumped, but I don't really understand the variable output voltage and the effect that this will have.  I will be running the qutest into an amp and sound kenzie headphone amp which then goes directly into headphones.  Can anyone give me any suggestions or things I should consider in setting the variable output voltage?  Thanks!!


Use 2V and if it sounds ok with the volume setting to all percentages you are good.Watts gave a detailed explanation before.


----------



## SearchOfSub

stickboy85 said:


> Would very much like to hear your thoughts on this. I'm planning on getting a Zen/Zenith and Qutest to go with my wireless KEF LS50.




Do you have the KEF LS50?


----------



## Hummer25

Zzt231gr said:


> Hummer,that was awesome.You can't have good sounding music if even one piece of your link doesn't deliver!
> Use 2V and if it sounds ok with the volume setting to all percentages you are good.Watts gave a detailed explanation before.



Yes the Innuos Zen made a massive difference to the overall performance with the Qutest.


----------



## Hummer25

SearchOfSub said:


> Do you have the KEF LS50?




I have not got LS50s but have heard them quite a few times - they are superb and would fully recommend them!


----------



## jarnopp

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Question re: Variable output voltage setting:
> 
> My qutest arrives in 2 days.  Super pumped, but I don't really understand the variable output voltage and the effect that this will have.  I will be running the qutest into an amp and sound kenzie headphone amp which then goes directly into headphones.  Can anyone give me any suggestions or things I should consider in setting the variable output voltage?  Thanks!!



Try to find your amplifier’s input sensitivity. If, for example, it’s 2V, that means a 2V signal will drive it to max volume. You would use your preamp or digital volume control on an app, or the volume control in your amp if it’s an integrated amp, to lower the volume from there. But, depending how you are controlling the volume, you might choose a higher or lower setting so that you get e good volume range around middle position, especially if you are using an analog volume control.


----------



## stickboy85

Hummer25 said:


> Just tried Qutest with InnuOS  Zen Mini mk2 server and many of my observations regarding the Qutest have changed. With the Macbook pro running Audirvana I felt slightly detached from the performance/music and the soundstage was a bit flat. I also noticed a lack of dynamics and bass. However with the InnuOS Zen things have changed considerably. The soundstage now has greater width and lots more depth, dynamics and detail have increased substantially. Tonal quality and bass has improved, in particular the bass is now quite muscular. i am running the Qutest into an all valve preamp with a very nice valve line stage and the match seems perfect. The difference between the Macbook and InnuOS is huge which just goes to show you need a good front end feeding the DAC.
> 
> Vocals are very palpable and real with a great presence in the room. The Qutest, like DAVE is smooth sounding and very analogue in its presentation with very little remaining to remind you are listening to digital audio. For the money Qutest is very good value as I feel it gives me 75-80% of DAVE. Where it looses out is on soundstage /, depth and micro nuances in the music and the sheer gravity and wallop DAVE can produce in the bottom end. However in my system Qutest gives me as much as I could want and on well mastered material it really delivers the goods.
> 
> ...



Nice update, thanks for sharing.
I'm even more curious as to what the Zen/Zenith would do to the Qutest now!


----------



## stickboy85

SearchOfSub said:


> Do you have the KEF LS50?



I do indeed!


----------



## Hummer25

stickboy85 said:


> Nice update, thanks for sharing.
> I'm even more curious as to what the Zen/Zenith would do to the Qutest now!



I have heard the Zen and Zenith with DAVE and both certainly deliver a great sound. If the Zen mini mk2 was as good as I heard with Qutest then the Zen or zenith should sound quite a bit better. I believe Innuos now have a two box server out which is a serious piece of kit but costs a fair bit.


----------



## Chaldee

I would love to hear some opinion about using optical cable from either qutest or 2qute into a NAD M50 streamer. I never seem to find what I look for in the range of streamer, but I really did with the NAD M50. USB is my first choice of cable connection but it is not an option with the mentioned streamer. It contains no internal DAC and thus exits a low jitter digital data stream via all popular interfaces such as S/PDif, Toslink & AES/EBU. I'm question myself if I will loose considerable quality of sound not using the galvanic isolated USB connection. To be frankly, I'm a novice when it comes down to hifi-knowledge.


----------



## Rhinomyte76

Just wanted to share my 2 cents after my first 24 hours with Qutest in case it helps anyone.

First, when I unpacked it after delivery, it sounded like something was loose inside. Commence freak out as here in the States we have been waiting forever.  Upon further inspection, I discovered that the filter and input buttons rattle ever so slightly, which makes sense because they have to move when pushed.  Obviously not an issue, and every other physical aspect seems tooled to perfection.

I use the USB input from a pc with various doodads and filters in the chain at different times depending upon the devices.  
I had some problems getting the Qutest to play nicely with the ifi IUSB 3.0 and my uptone audio USPCB.  After mutliple pluggings and unpluggings, I finally got the signal to be recognized by my PC with the IUSB 3.0 in the chain.  I have unplugged it multiple times and had to do this again. I have not found a consistent order that works and voodoo seems to be at play. Not a hit against the Qutest.  I even had similar experiences a handful of times with other IFI products with the IUSB.

Also, my PC wouldn't recognize a signal at all with the USPCB voltage off, so even though the qutest has a separate 5v port, it seems as though some power is needed for the handshake on the usb.  (Not 100% on this.  Could be just a device incompatibility issue, maybe someone else can weigh in on this?)  

I had the ifi IDSD Black Label in my chain prior to this, so most of the observations will be in regard to that device. When going through my library in JRiver after about 30 hours burn-in, I noticed some great detail, decently broad soundstage, but not the broadest I've heard.  The center stage / vocals seemed to move closer up to the front compared to the ifi IDSD BL, which I very much apprecaited as my current headphone pairing has them a little recessed from my ideal setup.  The things that often really stick out for me when putting a more revealing device in the chain are percussion and being able to distinguish phrasing of overlapping instruments. Both were readily apparent with the Qutest.  Some lesser emphasised layers in the tracks came out better than I had heard before.  This is with using a Kenzie tube amp, whereas I've heard these tracks with a pure solid state setup, so that's obviously a big plus. 

One thing that was readily apparent was that this DAC shows the detail in tracks, warts and all.  Even though my system is relatively quiet, the background noise on poorly recorded albums really came through.  Layla & Other Assorted Love Songs is one of my favorite albums for musical content, but most hated for recording quality.  Whether listening to the album on 24/96 flac or Platinum SHM, the noise was very loud.  Louder than I've ever heard it.  I noticed a similar effect on the well recorded but somewhat noisy 24/192 flac version of Pet Sounds to a lesser degree. 

Additionally, one issue that popped up was that I cannot determine how to play dsf files or sacd burns. These automatically fired up with the IFI BL. 

The only hesitation I have currently is the technical /  sharp sound for lack of a better term.  Overall, tracks seem antiseptic.  The individual instruments sound great, and even though the timing is tight, the flow and synergy seem lacking. Almost as if the Qutest would be perfect for analyzing, but not as enjoyable for just relaxing and letting the music wash over you.  The warm filter and roll off filters help this slightly, but not enough for my taste.  It's too early to pass judgment on the qutest after only 30 hours of burn in and even less time allowing my ears to adjust to its sound.  Additionally, it is always possible the Qutest is helping me identify other flaws in my chain (like the USPCB that I may go ahead and remove if things don't change soon)  Long story short take all this with a grain of salt, and hope it helps.  If things change I will surely revise the post.  Please let me know if I can answer questions for anyone.  Thanks.


----------



## zek4u

Hummer25 said:


> Hi Christer,
> 
> I will be used with an upgraded fully valve regulated Croft 25R preamp which is extremely revealing and transparent. This is partnered with a Croft 7 OTL power amp. I understand the output of the Qutest can be changed to suit the gain of my preamp so this will be interesting.
> 
> ...



@Hummer25   Just got my second Croft 25R/7R combo for my latest Harbeth P3ESRs. Full circle and not sure why I left. Qutest arrives soon and hope it’s a good marriage. 20X2L to Audio Note SUT to the 25R is sublime. Ran the pre out to the HDV 820/HD800s. Wow x5. Would hope with one of the filters on the Qutest I’ll find a good match. The Dac out of the HDV 820 isn’t half bad.


----------



## JWahl

Rhinomyte76 said:


> The only hesitation I have currently is the technical /  sharp sound for lack of a better term.  Overall, tracks seem antiseptic.  The individual instruments sound great, and even though the timing is tight, the flow and synergy seem lacking. Almost as if the Qutest would be perfect for analyzing, but not as enjoyable for just relaxing and letting the music wash over you.  The warm filter and roll off filters help this slightly, but not enough for my taste.  It's too early to pass judgment on the qutest after only 30 hours of burn in and even less time allowing my ears to adjust to its sound.  Additionally, it is always possible the Qutest is helping me identify other flaws in my chain (like the USPCB that I may go ahead and remove if things don't change soon)  Long story short take all this with a grain of salt, and hope it helps.  If things change I will surely revise the post.  Please let me know if I can answer questions for anyone.  Thanks.



Are you also using your iUSB to power the Qutest?  Or only connecting the data via the USPCB?  I'm using the Nano and haven't had any connection problems, but I'm using both the iUSB outputs for data and power respectively instead of the Qutest's adapter.


----------



## Rhinomyte76

JWahl said:


> Are you also using your iUSB to power the Qutest?  Or only connecting the data via the USPCB?  I'm using the Nano and haven't had any connection problems, but I'm using both the iUSB outputs for data and power respectively instead of the Qutest's adapter.



Jwahl thanks for trying to help me troubleshoot. Unfortunately I am also using the iusb for power and data already.  At least it’s working.


----------



## Hummer25

zek4u said:


> @Hummer25   Just got my second Croft 25R/7R combo for my latest Harbeth P3ESRs. Full circle and not sure why I left. Qutest arrives soon and hope it’s a good marriage. 20X2L to Audio Note SUT to the 25R is sublime. Ran the pre out to the HDV 820/HD800s. Wow x5. Would hope with one of the filters on the Qutest I’ll find a good match. The Dac out of the HDV 820 isn’t half bad.



The Croft combination is superb, I Have the Croft 25R (RS line stage) and the Series 7 power amp and they are a great combination. The Qutest is probably best used at 2v output through the Croft line stage as their is a fair bit of gain in the Croft. I did try 3v and it sounded ok. Because the Series 7 power amp is a OTL you get amazing transparency with the Qutest, you see through into the recordings and vocals are holographic with you in the room. Almost uncanny. I think you will enjoy the Qutest. I used an Innuos Zen server with my Qutest and this made a big difference.


----------



## Bill13 (May 11, 2018)

Got my new Qutest DAC about a week ago.

 'Review' comments (my opinions):

Impression: The Qutest sounds better than my Berkeley Alpha DAC, and my Oppo 105.

Would like to do at-home comparisons to the extremely expensive top-of-the-line DACs like the Rossini, Chord Dave and the just released TT (2), Berkeley Reference 2, Manhattan DAC, etc. --- But funds just don't permit.

Listening evaluation comparisons included CDs:  Vivaldi 'Four Seasons' by Philharmonia with Elizabeth Blumenstock, violin -- (CD was rave reviewed by Stereophile) & a couple of Stereophile test CDs.

Played some old Denon Bach organ CDs recorded in the '80s which, IMO, thru the Qutest sounded a lot like current SOA hi res recordings IMO.
I recall that Rob Watts stated in his NYC CanJam 2018 seminar that a purpose of the Chord 'WTA filter'  algorithm was to recreate the original sound of the music which happened *prior* to the digital recording's analogue-to-digital conversion.

MY system: highly modified Audience '16+16' speakers with large RAAL ribbon tweeters (140D amorphic core) covering above 2.5 kHz.  Amplifiers are Hypex Ncore amps (IMO, fantastic sound).
A 'passive preamp' was used to control volume because the Qutest has sufficient output voltage available (can select up to 3 volts out).

Natural, & 'you-are-there' sound.
Qutest lifted a veil that I was not previously aware of.
The Soundstage with my speaker system opened up both in width & depth.  Vivaldi CD's violin just floated in space - instruments had tangible 'body' that I haven't experienced before..

There were other superlatives noted.  Not enough time to mention more listening details here.

Conclusion: I'm very pleased with the Qutest, to say the least.

Enough for now.


----------



## kovacs (May 11, 2018)

Just received my Chord Qutest and I had an entire evening planned AB comparing the Chord Qutest with a Cambridge audio CXC transport with my old Rega Planet CD-player, a CD player which I’ve enjoyed immensely for the last 10 years. Well, I don’t need to compare anything, from the first song it’s obvious that I’m hearing things I’ve never heard before, with individual instruments sounding much better seperated. I can hear so many more details, with a saxophone I can hear there is a reed vibrating, with a piano I can hear the strings vibrate and the cabinet resonate. I’m very sensitive to bright sounding equipment and the Chord with the incisive filter doesn’t sound bright at all to me ( and it’s not even burned in ), just very detailed. I’m extremely impressed so far. I’m using the stock power supply at the moment but a Linear power supply is on its way, honestly not sure if it will make a difference but I don’t want to risk it, the stock power supply feels and looks so cheap, the tiny power cable especially feels extremely cheap and flimsy, couldn’t they have picked a slightly more substantial one ? Device milled from a solid block of aluminium, gorgious buttons, nice glass window, nice packaging, cheapest looking power supply in the world, seriously ? Really detracts from the overall impressive build quality. Shame on Chord for choosing the absolute cheapest one available, this unit deserves better. Really bugs me ! Ok, back to the music, currently listening to some albums that I know very well and I’ve never heard sound from behind the speakers, just wasn’t possible in my room before. Soundstage is a little wider but much deeper. It’s hard writing this, I keep closing my eyes. I was so afraid that I had spend too much on just a DAC, buyers remorse surely would hit hard when I couldn’t hear a big difference between bits or the sound was too cold and bright, thank god that isn’t the case and I’ve got a massive grin on my face listening to some of my favourite music.


----------



## jayz (May 11, 2018)

kovacs said:


> Just received my Chord Qutest and I had an entire evening planned AB comparing the Chord Qutest with a Cambridge audio CXC transport with my old Rega Planet CD-player, a CD player which I’ve enjoyed immensely for the last 10 years. Well, I don’t need to compare anything, from the first song it’s obvious that I’m hearing things I’ve never heard before, with individual instruments sounding much better seperated. I can hear so many more details, with a saxophone I can hear there is a reed vibrating, with a piano I can hear the strings vibrate and the cabinet resonate. I’m very sensitive to bright sounding equipment and the Chord with the incisive filter doesn’t sound bright at all to me ( and it’s not even burned in ), just very detailed. I’m extremely impressed so far. I’m using the stock power supply at the moment but a Linear power supply is on its way, not sure if it will make a difference but I don’t want to risk it, the stock power supply feels and looks cheap, the tiny power cable especially feels extremely cheap, couldn’t they have picked a slightly more substantial one ? Really detracts from the overall impressive build quality. Shame on Chord for choosing the absolute cheapest and thinnest one available, this unit deserves better. Really bugs me ! Ok, back to the music, currently listening to some albums that I know very well and I’ve never heard sound from behind the speakers, just wasn’t possible in my room before. Soundstage is a little wider but much deeper. It’s hard writing this, I keep closing my eyes. I was so afraid that I had spend too much on just a DAC, buyers remorse surely would hit hard when I couldn’t hear a big difference betweens bits or the sound was too cold and bright, thank god that isn’t the case and I’ve got a massive grin on my face listening to some of my favourite music.




Glad your enjoying Qutest. The amazing depth, height, and width of the soundstage that Qutest throws still baffles me 4 months on.

But a bit puzzled on the "Shame on Chord..." comment. Now you do realise that it's the same designer/company who designed the DAC (which you praise) who also decided on a stock power supply right? Or did YOU do a technical power supply performance eval + build & materials + R&D costing + ROI analysis and conclude that Chord should have given a better supply for the asking price? Or perhaps you are suggesting even if it makes a little difference technically, Chord should have had heftier supply and should have charged all of us who bought a Qutest a couple of hundred more for it ? Or maybe the suggestion is to follow the likes of Naim, Linn , etc. and offer power supply upgrades every few years and charge customers top dollar for upgrades?

On the other hand, is there anything stopping you ( or anyone else) who bought a Qutest getting a bigger & heavier supply ? Do you get where this is heading...


----------



## miketlse

jayz said:


> Glad your enjoying Qutest. The amazing depth, height, and width of the soundstage that Qutest throws still baffles me 4 months on.
> 
> But a bit puzzled on the "Shame on Chord..." comment. Now you do realise that it's the same designer/company who designed the DAC (which you praise) who also decided on a stock power supply right? Or did YOU do a technical power supply performance eval + build & materials + R&D costing + ROI analysis and conclude that Chord should have given a better supply for the asking price? Or perhaps you are suggesting even if it makes a little difference technically, Chord should have had heftier supply and should have charged all of us who bought a Qutest a couple of hundred more for it ? Or maybe the suggestion is to follow the likes of Naim, Linn , etc. and offer power supply upgrades every few years and charge customers top dollar for upgrades?
> 
> On the other hand, is there anything stopping you ( or anyone else) who bought a Qutest getting a bigger & heavier supply ? Do you get where this is heading...


Don't bite.

It reminds me of the debate on the Hugo2 thread about remote controls.

i admit that I take a functional engineering point of view.
i appreciate a minimalist design principle, so i love the remote that chord supplied. It has buttons for all the functionality that is needed, and no more.
But there were posters who complained that Chord did not supply a metal remote with 50 buttons, most of which will never be used.
For them form matters far more than functionality.
A similar situation exists with power supplies - chord ship power supplies that meet the functional requirements. Anything else is pure excess.


----------



## kovacs (May 11, 2018)

jayz said:


> Glad your enjoying Qutest. The amazing depth, height, and width of the soundstage that Qutest throws still baffles me 4 months on.
> 
> But a bit puzzled on the "Shame on Chord..." comment. Now you do realise that it's the same designer/company who designed the DAC (which you praise) who also decided on a stock power supply right? Or did YOU do a technical power supply performance eval + build & materials + R&D costing + ROI analysis and conclude that Chord should have given a better supply for the asking price? Or perhaps you are suggesting even if it makes a little difference technically, Chord should have had heftier supply and should have charged all of us who bought a Qutest a couple of hundred more for it ? Or maybe the suggestion is to follow the likes of Naim, Linn , etc. and offer power supply upgrades every few years and charge customers top dollar for upgrades?
> 
> On the other hand, is there anything stopping you ( or anyone else) who bought a Qutest getting a bigger & heavier supply ? Do you get where this is heading...



The included power supply probably performs fine, can’t tell really, what I’m complaining about is how it looks and feels compared to the rest. The window feels like real glass, can’t be cheap and does nothing for the sound, they shouldn’t have done that but they did anyway. The device is milled from a solid block of aluminium, perfect, far from the cheapest option, but they did it anyway because it matters and they care. The package it comes in is really nice and well designed, clearly some thought went into it, won’t see it often, but hey you won’t hear me complain. They designed the device to perform well with any decent power supply, makes sense to include something simple, but like they chose glass for the window they should have chosen better materials for the power supply and cable, they were so close. The power supply and cable is something is will see and touch all the time, did they really have to chose this one ? Surely one that feels and looks nicer can’t be that much more expensive, we’re talking a few dollars more at most, these things are really cheap ! It’s the only thing they didn’t design and make in-house and it’s the only thing where they settled for good enough, shame.

Do YOU ( see I can use a condescending tone as well ) really believe they spend much on R&D for the power supply, if they did it wouldn’t look like this. They clearly picked one from a catalog, no need to reinvent the wheel when you have hundreds of models already available on the chinese market.


----------



## zek4u (May 11, 2018)

@jayz      I also ordered an MCRU linear PSU for my Qutest. I probably violated Chord's warranty when I used the same brand's PSU on my 2Qute. I think it sounded better. Yes, Rob said he couldn't hear a difference between the cheap PSU and a battery. It is my opinion that a good PSU helps eliminate RFI and EMI further up stream on the AC lines. Not everyone has per socket isolation/conditioning or lives in a place with clean power. For a few hundred bucks, it gives me some peace of mind. Oh, I have a dedicated circuit with a good Cutler-Hammer switch box. Ran Romex 10/2 WG to a Shunyata SR-Z1 AC Outlet.

@Hummer25     Super excited to try the Qutest with the Croft combo. I originally wanted a Hugo 2 to deal with my vintage Naim Nait 2s channel imbalance at low volumes. Higher gain on 2Qute made it an issue. Love that Rob's volume implementation causes little to no degradation at lower volumes. Had no idea the Qutest was going to have this ability even if it is just 3V, 2V, etc. I'm sure 2V will be perfect with the 25R and I will report back. I'm using a CAPs Carbon powered by a Teddy 12V. Blue Jeans CAT 6 to a good Linksys router (don't use your cable companies router!!!). Linksys router to a microRendu powered by a 9V Teddy PSU. No garbage in, no garbage out. Big fan of jRiver/jRemote. Thinking about upgrading to an ultraRendu.


----------



## kovacs

Bill13 said:


> Natural, & 'you-are-there' sound.
> Qutest lifted a veil that I was not previously aware of.
> The Soundstage with my speaker system opened up both in width & depth.  Vivaldi CD's violin just floated in space - instruments had tangible 'body' that I haven't experienced before.



Agree with this description 100%, perfectly explains the improvements I’m hearing. It lifted a veil I didn’t know was there and it’s letting me hear details and information I didn’t even know could be on a regular CD.


----------



## Sound Eq (May 11, 2018)

i am in search for a desktop dac the provides the same kind of mojo mids, to my ears the mojo mids when connected to my ifi pro can sounds so much better than ifi black label
as it sounds fuller and richer and more forward than ifi black label

how doe qutest compare to mojo as just dacs


----------



## Bill13

I read an opinion that the Qutest sound quality is roughly 75-80 percent of the Dave.  Assuming that this opinion is reasonable, then the Qutest is a good deal for not-so-well-healed audiophiles.

At CanJam 2018 NYC I listened to the Dave with Blu2 (Blu2 provided a 1 million tap FPGA-based upsampling M-scaler which was connected at the Dave's digital input).  I also did a comparison to the Qutest at NYC 2018 CanJam.
Mr. Speakers Aeon flow closed-back planar magnetic headphones reduced the ambient noise a bit. 
The CanJam show's ridiculous noisy environment made any judgment of comparative sound quality difficult to make.  However, even in this environment the Qutest aquited itself surprisingly well, IMO.


----------



## x RELIC x

Sound Eq said:


> i am in search for a desktop dac the provides the same kind of mojo mids, to my ears the mojo mids when connected to my ifi pro can sounds so much better than ifi black label
> as it sounds fuller and richer and more forward than ifi black label
> 
> how doe qutest compare to mojo as just dacs



The Qutest actually has the same analogue stage as the Mojo so I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some similarities. On the other hand it has an improved WTA filter and 10e vs 4e Pulse Array DAC, which may sound different to Mojo tonally but more precise.

I’m interested in a direct comparison as well with Qutest vs Mojo, for reference. The Hugo2 has the same WTA and 10e Pulse Array as the Qutest, but a different analogue stage. The Hugo2 is definitely more incisive and has much better transients compared to the Mojo, IMO, but Hugo2 sounds slightly brighter overall than the Mojo.


----------



## Skampmeister

Dunno about anyone else, but the PSU talk is getting old. Again, the supplied PSU performs as well as a battery.


----------



## MusicJunky

For someone that already has the DX200, would it be a good spend to buy the Qutest as a dac and use the DX200 as the source? Is the Qutest dac worth it over the ES9028pro dacs inside the DX200? Thanks.


----------



## naynay

Qutest  2volt output big improvement using Rega Elex-R amp.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Just ordered Qutest-I am so excited!

Kovacs,that was a great review.

How do you find CXC as a transport in general?
Have you tried optical vs RCA output for sound quality?
Have you compared Rega vs CXC as transport?


----------



## Sound Eq

x RELIC x said:


> The Qutest actually has the same analogue stage as the Mojo so I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some similarities. On the other hand it has an improved WTA filter and 10e vs 4e Pulse Array DAC, which may sound different to Mojo tonally but more precise.
> 
> I’m interested in a direct comparison as well with Qutest vs Mojo, for reference. The Hugo2 has the same WTA and 10e Pulse Array as the Qutest, but a different analogue stage. The Hugo2 is definitely more incisive and has much better transients compared to the Mojo, IMO, but Hugo2 sounds slightly brighter overall than the Mojo.



somehow i liked the forward mids on mojo than hugo 2


----------



## Zzt231gr

x RELIC x said:


> The Qutest actually has the same analogue stage as the Mojo so I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some similarities. On the other hand it has an improved WTA filter and 10e vs 4e Pulse Array DAC, which may sound different to Mojo tonally but more precise.
> 
> I’m interested in a direct comparison as well with Qutest vs Mojo, for reference. The Hugo2 has the same WTA and 10e Pulse Array as the Qutest, but a different analogue stage. The Hugo2 is definitely more incisive and has much better transients compared to the Mojo, IMO, but Hugo2 sounds slightly brighter overall than the Mojo.


Are you sure about the output stage being the same??


----------



## kovacs (May 12, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Just ordered Qutest-I am so excited!
> 
> Kovacs,that was a great review.
> 
> ...



The Rega is a great CD-player, I like it a lot, but used as a CD-transport it less impressive. It's hard to explain, but something seems off, music doesn't flow like it should, it sounds harsh and uneasy. I heard it before with my Musical Fidelity V90 as a DAC and I'm hearing it again with this DAC, I guess bits aren't bits after all. The Cambridge audio CXC seems much calmer and composed, the Rega sounds chaotic in comparison. It's not a small difference either, I find it hard to listen to the Rega as a transport. I haven't compared the optical vs the RCA output on the Cambridge, but it's something I can easily do since both outputs work simultaneously on the CXC and the Chord Qutest allows me to quickly change between the two. Give me a few days and I'll report back to you. Currently I'm using a nice BNC to RCA digital cable from Ghent audio. If I can't hear difference I'll keep using that since I want to use the optical input for my airport express.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Thank you.So,I might buy a new transport.

I am also a click away from buying Belden 1694A with Canare 75Ω RCA to Canare BNC.Your comparison would be crucial for me.


----------



## Zowie1 (May 15, 2018)

Has anyone paired their Qutest (or 2Qute) with ifi Micro iDSD? If you have, how were the results compared to just using Micro iDSD? My current chain goes like this: iDefender 3.0 > Mercury 3.0 cable > iPurifier2 > Micro iDSD BL > HE1000 with iSilencer 3.0 and ISO Regen added soon. I was wondering if adding a separate DAC would improve the sound even further.


----------



## x RELIC x

Zzt231gr said:


> Are you sure about the output stage being the same??



I wouldn’t have posted otherwise. 



Rob Watts said:


> Yes I too saw that... But 2 qute, although having a discrete op stage, is not powerful; it was never intended to drive any low impedance at all. Qutest op stage has been upgraded, but it's not the same as Hugo 2. The op impedance has not been measured, so any mention of it is an error. But I have increased the drive on the discrete op stage, and I have used the Mojo op stage. This has the benefit of being very small, but capable of delivering large currents. But let's be clear; qutest was designed as a DAC only! As an aside, the Mojo op stage is the same as Hugo 2 electronically, but differs with the packaging and power delivery of the op transistors.





Rob Watts said:


> Yes it's the same number and transistor packaging as Mojo.
> 
> And no power button - as Qutest only consumes a modest couple of Watts.


----------



## daredevil_kk

x RELIC x said:


> I wouldn’t have posted otherwise.


From the above statement, this what I understand. The Qutest has similar circuit as the Hugo 2 but with Mojo opamp stage...
Am I right?


----------



## bmfmarius

> Qutest 2volt output big improvement using Rega Elex-R amp.


Can you elaborate?!
I have the same amp.., with Mojo, on 3V output ( desktop mode)! 
Rega states that the amp can receive 10V max!
I think it's better with 3V! Or Maybe Mojo has been optimised for 3V!


----------



## x RELIC x

daredevil_kk said:


> From the above statement, this what I understand. The Qutest has similar circuit as the Hugo 2 but with Mojo opamp stage...
> Am I right?



The WTA filter and Pulse Array DAC seem to be the exact same as Hugo2 (only Rob can 100% confirm), but the OP stage is based off of the Mojo is how I understand it.


----------



## Zzt231gr

x RELIC x said:


> I wouldn’t have posted otherwise.


Watts statement is confusing though ...


----------



## SearchOfSub

zek4u said:


> @Hummer25   Just got my second Croft 25R/7R combo for my latest Harbeth P3ESRs. Full circle and not sure why I left. Qutest arrives soon and hope it’s a good marriage. 20X2L to Audio Note SUT to the 25R is sublime. Ran the pre out to the HDV 820/HD800s. Wow x5. Would hope with one of the filters on the Qutest I’ll find a good match. The Dac out of the HDV 820 isn’t half bad.



 Anyone hear the Sony SS-NA5ES?


----------



## kovacs (May 14, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> ^^Thank you.So,I might buy a new transport.
> 
> I am also a click away from buying Belden 1694A with Canare 75Ω RCA to Canare BNC.Your comparison would be crucial for me.



Hey man, I just compared the Optical vs. the RCA output from the Cambridge CXC transport, both sound good, but I prefer the RCA to BNC cable over the optical connection, seems to sound fuller and has a better soundstage. Not sure how much is down to the cables ( Oehlbach optical cable and Ghent Audio RCA to BNC 75 Ohm cable ) and how much is the connection type, but I think the RCA to BNC cable sounds better. Just my 2 cents... I don’t think you can go wrong with the Belden.

Also compared the 4 filters, with the CD’s I’ve tried I definitely prefered the White ( Incisive neutral ) filter, doesn’t sound too bright to me, just well extended and detailed. I’m using a tube amp, so that may do some high frequency filtering on its own. Haven’t tried high resolution files yet, tried to use a DVD player as a SACD player but can’t get any sound, not sure what I’m doing wrong.


----------



## Zzt231gr

kovacs said:


> Hey man, I just compared the Optical vs. the RCA output from the Cambridge CXC transport, both sound good, but I prefer the RCA to BNC cable over the optical connection, seems to sound fuller and has a better soundstage, not sure how much is down to the cables ( Oehlbach optical cable and Ghent Audio RCA to BNC 75 Ohm cable ) and how much is the connection type. Also not sure if I would get the same result in a blind test, but I think the RCA to BNC cable sounds better. Just my 2 cents... I don’t think you can go wrong with the Belden.
> 
> Also compared the 4 filters, with the CD’s I’ve tried I definitely prefered the White ( Incisive neutral ) filter, doesn’t sound too bright to me, just well extended and detailed. I’m using a tube amp, so that may do some high frequency filtering on its own. Haven’t tried high resolution files yet, tried to use a DVD player as a SACD player but can’t get any sound, not sure what I’m doing wrong.


The result is as I expected.I don't think that the cables are the deal.I'm pretty sure it is the connection type!

Sacd won't deliver digital signal through Optical neither BNC.It is copyright issue.


----------



## jayz (May 14, 2018)

kovacs said:


> Do YOU ( see I can use a condescending tone as well ) really believe they spend much on R&D for the power supply, if they did it wouldn’t look like this. They clearly picked one from a catalog, no need to reinvent the wheel when you have hundreds of models already available on the chinese market.



It is about R&D for the DAC. Any other manufacturer will have priced this level of DAC performance double what Chord is asking for IMO. Qutest is priced within reach of a wider audience. Anyway, Qutest is meant to be carrying better power regulation electronics so the stock supply is supposed to be adequate. We have been through this discussion many times but there is a possibility other components in the system could be susceptible to switch mode noise so another supply might be better suited in such cases.

I started off my journey in audio blindly following the norm - at one point I had separate Isotek power conditioners for individual monoblock amps plus a separate conditioner for the rack full of electronics connected to each other with shiny fat cables of different shapes. These days however, the Qutest feeds directly to active speakers and powered using two £30 Tacima CS947 power strips and this setup sounds significantly better that what I had. So I have learnt to put the pennies where it matters most.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^I totally agree.But is there a definitive answer if an aftermarket PSU helps Qutest sound better??


----------



## jayz

Zzt231gr said:


> ^^I totally agree.But is there a definitive answer if an aftermarket PSU helps Qutest sound better??



I haven't heard of anyone doing an exhaustive/repeatable test to check although some have reported they heard improvements with another power supply while some others reported they did not hear a benefit. Best option might be to try it out in your system and maybe return it within trial period if it makes no difference.


----------



## azabu

Zzt231gr said:


> ^^I totally agree.But is there a definitive answer if an aftermarket PSU helps Qutest sound better??



I'm using the Uptone LPS 1.2 and the regular Regen and it's a worthwhile improvement. 

have a look on CA for more consensus.

Uptone LPS 1.2 and Iso Regen bundle:
https://uptoneaudio.com/products/iso-regen?variant=37469467788

DC29 Oyaide DC-2.1G/2.5G to USB(2.0) DC Cable:
http://www.ghentaudio.com/part/dc29.html


----------



## soares

I will report aa soon my Qutest arrives, hopefully by the end of this week.


----------



## Zzt231gr

azabu said:


> I'm using the Uptone LPS 1.2 and the regular Regen and it's a worthwhile improvement.
> 
> have a look on CA for more consensus.
> 
> ...


Are these for improving USB signal?I will feed my Qutest solely through Optical and Coaxial.


----------



## azabu (May 14, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Are these for improving USB signal?I will feed my Qutest solely through Optical and Coaxial.



yes, Iso-regen is for USB.

then just LPS 1.2 or JS-2 linear power supplies. I was impressed with the LPS 1.2, enough to order the JS-2.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Any links,please?


----------



## daredevil_kk

Zzt231gr said:


> ^^I totally agree.But is there a definitive answer if an aftermarket PSU helps Qutest sound better??


Only if you have a noisy or  sensitive power supply circuit, then yes or else save your money for the main items.


----------



## plsvn

Zzt231gr said:


> ^^Any links,please?



https://uptoneaudio.com


----------



## Zzt231gr

Thank you sir!


----------



## zek4u

I don't remember having to adjust the gain out of jRiver with the 2Qute. I would just leave the volume at 100%, I get some pretty bad distortion even if the Qutest is set at 2V. It's like my microRendu/jRiver set to DLNA is overloading the Qutest's input. Move the volume slider in jRiver down to 55-70% and distortion goes away. Anyone else have this issue?  Guess adjusting the volume as I did is fine?  This seems to only happen with redbook files. So strange.


----------



## daredevil_kk

In case anyone interested in specs and wants to compare between the different models.

Mojo        Artix XC7A25T    26,000 Tap    4 Element Pulse DAC    .00017% THD N/A A Noise    115db S/N    120db Sep.    0.075Ohm Output Z    
+/- .2db 20Hz – 20KHz Response    .72W into 8Ohms Max.    Damping w/ Utopia 1,133x    90 DSP Cores


Qutest        Artix XC7A15T    49,152 Tap    10 Element Pulse DAC    .00013% THD2.6uV A Noise    126db S/N    138db Sep.    0.09Ohm Output Z 
+/- .2db 20Hz – 20KHz Response    Max. Out N/A        Damping w/ Utopia 944x    45 DSP Cores


Hugo 2        Artix XC7A15T    49,152 Tap    10 Element Pulse DAC    .0001% THD 2.6uV A Noise    126db S/N    135db Sep.    0.025Ohm Output Z   
+/- .2db 20Hz – 20KHz Response    1.05W into 8Ohms Max.    Damping w/ Utopia  3,400X    45 DSP Cores


Hugo TT 2    Artix Model N/A    93,304 Tap    10 Element Pulse DAC    .00008%THD  1.7uV A Noise    127db S/N    138db Sep.    0.042Ohm Output Z    
+/- .2db 20Hz – 20KHz Response    18W into 8Ohms Max.    Damping with Utopia 2,023X    90 DSP Cores


Dave    Spartan XC65SLXX75    164,000Tap    20 Element DAC    .00004% THD1.6uV A Noise    127.5db S/N    125db Sep.    0.055Ohm Output Z    
+/- .1db 20Hz – 20KHz Response    1.4W into 33 Ohm Max.    Damping w/ Utopia  1,545X    166 DSP Cores (but some are in the FPGA Fabric)


----------



## Rhinomyte76

zek4u said:


> I don't remember having to adjust the gain out of jRiver with the 2Qute. I would just leave the volume at 100%, I get some pretty bad distortion even if the Qutest is set at 2V. It's like my microRendu/jRiver set to DLNA is overloading the Qutest's input. Move the volume slider in jRiver down to 55-70% and distortion goes away. Anyone else have this issue?  Guess adjusting the volume as I did is fine?  This seems to only happen with redbook files. So strange.



Zek4U - I am using JRiver in my setup as well, but with my main source PC not via DLNA to a HTPC or other networked machine.  My Qutest is set to 2V. I do not get any distortion at 100% volume in JRiver.  I am assuming that it shouldn't matter whether you are going through DLNA or not because the music files are played the same either way.  I may check your settings in terms of output formats etc. and maybe go back to default to trouble shoot it.  BTW I have noticed that background noise / noise floor is much higher and more noticeable on poorly recorded tracks through the Qutest.  However, in my experience, it is because the Qutest is revealing and unforgiving in that regard.  Well done recordings with low noise floor sound pretty black through the Qutest, so I know its the recording, not the DAC.  If I was getting distortion, I would also check your physical connections.  Do you still have the 2Qute to use as a reference?


----------



## zek4u (May 15, 2018)

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Zek4U - I am using JRiver in my setup as well, but with my main source PC not via DLNA to a HTPC or other networked machine.  My Qutest is set to 2V. I do not get any distortion at 100% volume in JRiver.  I am assuming that it shouldn't matter whether you are going through DLNA or not because the music files are played the same either way.  I may check your settings in terms of output formats etc. and maybe go back to default to trouble shoot it.  BTW I have noticed that background noise / noise floor is much higher and more noticeable on poorly recorded tracks through the Qutest.  However, in my experience, it is because the Qutest is revealing and unforgiving in that regard.  Well done recordings with low noise floor sound pretty black through the Qutest, so I know its the recording, not the DAC.  If I was getting distortion, I would also check your physical connections.  Do you still have the 2Qute to use as a reference?



Thank you @Rhinomyte76  . Think I just got unlucky with my Qutest. I actually hear distortion with my DSDs and of course you can't lower the volume if you have jRiver ser to playing original output. I can compensate for the distortion by lowering the volume in jRiver to 55% for PCM files. It is definite distortion and you can hear it in any dynamic vocal content. Have had multiple Chord 2Qutes in my configuration and know it isn't my setup. Tried coming straight out of computer, Peachtree 24/192 USB/Optical converter and my microRendu. I'll send it in for someone to take a look.  This is something on the input gain. Changing the output from 2V to 3V just makes the distortion louder.


----------



## naynay

bmfmarius said:


> Can you elaborate?!
> I have the same amp.., with Mojo, on 3V output ( desktop mode)!
> Rega states that the amp can receive 10V max!
> I think it's better with 3V! Or Maybe Mojo has been optimised for 3V!



Hi,
3V output to me was a little to lively 2V is a nice balance.


----------



## Rhinomyte76

Question for those of you using the Qutest with headphones...

I normally listen without crossfeed (via JRiver) because I like to be able to isolate the various instruments and sounds as much as possible.  

The qutest is very revealing which is great, however, in my opinion, the isolation and detail almost takes away from the fluidity of the music. It also seems fast or lively compared to DACs I am used to.  The combo of these traits has made listening through headphones without crossfeed very fatiguing compared to what I am used to.   Has anyone else found this? Am I just getting old?   

I haven't tried the Qutest with my LS50's yet, but I am assuming these circumstances wouldn't be an issue at all through speakers because the sound would naturally blend.  

Any input is appreciated.  Thanks.


----------



## SearchOfSub

azabu said:


> I'm using the Uptone LPS 1.2 and the regular Regen and it's a worthwhile improvement.
> 
> have a look on CA for more consensus.
> 
> ...





No it dosent. Stop saying other psu sound better when chord themselves said it dosent. Beside if chord qutest goes bad for whatevet reason while you have different psu plugged in it voids warranty the second you plug in that different psu. These cheap ass companies should stop trying to make money off chord. Its so direct then online shills come on these boards then make it sound like the other psu is what make chord qutest sound not even the DAC anymore. But their new custom psu they built is whats making the sound. Atleast ask fot permission before trying to make money off chord. 

The other day i was looking for used amplofier then this guy pm me saying he is willing to sell it etc. It has 35 wpc SET amp 300B tubes so i was kinda intetested but ultimately decided not to then lo and behold after a few missed email he emails me from another account and turns out this amplifier is actually made by himself. The whilr time he playing it off as a 3rd person so much praise for the amp. Shills so many shills


----------



## SearchOfSub (May 17, 2018)

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Question for those of you using the Qutest with headphones...
> 
> I normally listen without crossfeed (via JRiver) because I like to be able to isolate the various instruments and sounds as much as possible.
> 
> ...




Do you come from Tubes? Ive had a few Chord DACS and many other Solid State DACS and Chord was always fluid & musical while having high level of details. I didn't hear the Qutest yet but I plan to order one soon so I can concur with you then so you know it may be your speakers or other stuff in your chain. One thing for sure, the LS50 is a bad choice for Chord products. There is more from what you can get with Chord DACS. I have had the LS50's with the Hugo and when I changed out the speakers then Hugo came alive. LS50 is very unclear w/ lots of distortion and there is no detail in bass at all.


----------



## SearchOfSub

Howcome no one is really reviewing this DAC on this thread?


----------



## plsvn

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> 35 wpc SET amp 300B tubes



35W SET using 300Bs? 
it either is not a SET or has four 300Bs in series per channel!


----------



## SearchOfSub

Edit


----------



## SearchOfSub

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> Howcome no one is really reviewing this DAC on this thread?




Does the DAC suck?


----------



## stevedlu

I have listened to the Qutest extensively with the stock power supply($0),  ifi iPower 5v ($55) and the Uptone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2. ($435)

iPower is the best, seconded by Stock and followed by UltraCap (waste of money)

with ultracap the noise floor seems the worst, a lot less detail, everything dulled....how is that possible? so much for these boutique power supplies

Qutest>CMA600i>LCD-3


----------



## AlexB73 (May 17, 2018)

I have 2qute. I like the sound of this DAC.
Did anybody compare Qutest vs 2qute directly.
Is it a big difference in sound?
Do they have the same tonal balance?
Does it worth an upgrade?


----------



## dac64

stevedlu said:


> I have listened to the Qutest extensively with the stock power supply($0),  ifi iPower 5v ($55) and the Uptone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2. ($435)
> 
> iPower is the best, seconded by Stock and followed by UltraCap (waste of money



I will be graceful if you could make another comparison with a power bank.

I have the power bank but not qutest yet!


----------



## AlexB73 (May 17, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> The Qutest actually has the same analogue stage as the Mojo so I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some similarities. On the other hand it has an improved WTA filter and 10e vs 4e Pulse Array DAC, which may sound different to Mojo tonally but more precise.
> 
> I’m interested in a direct comparison as well with Qutest vs Mojo, for reference. The Hugo2 has the same WTA and 10e Pulse Array as the Qutest, but a different analogue stage. The Hugo2 is definitely more incisive and has much better transients compared to the Mojo, IMO, but Hugo2 sounds slightly brighter overall than the Mojo.


I don't have Qutest but I have 2Qute and Mojo.
I use both as DAC connected to my 300B integrated SET and speakers.
2Qute in significant more detailed and transparent. The sound is bigger and has more extended base and upper trebles.
Also, the sound of 2Qute is less grainy.
But on the other hand, Mojo can sound a little bit more lush and warmer.


----------



## x RELIC x

AlexB73 said:


> I don't have Qutest but I have 2Qute and Mojo.
> I use both as DAC connected to my 300B integrated SET and speakers.
> 2Qute in significant more detailed and transparent. The sound is bigger and has more extended base and upper trebles.
> Also, the sound of 2Qute is less grainy.
> But on other hand, Mojo can sound a little bit more lush and warmer.



Yeah, I don’t expect the 2Qute to be anywhere near the Mojo in regard to tonality. I was referring exclusively to the Qutest with its OP stage based off of the Mojo. Just curious to know how close those two specifically sound in comparison - again, exclusively regarding tonality.

2Qute is based off of Hugo1 which is brighter than Mojo, Hugo2, DAVE so I wouldn’t expect many tonal similarities.


----------



## AlexB73

2Qute is not bright at all. Actually it is very close to Mojo in term of tonal balance.
I don't compare it to Hugo by myself, but all people who did it reported that 2Qute is not as bright as Hugo.


----------



## azabu (May 18, 2018)

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> No it dosent. Stop saying other psu sound better when chord themselves said it dosent. Beside if chord qutest goes bad for whatevet reason while you have different psu plugged in it voids warranty the second you plug in that different psu. These cheap ass companies should stop trying to make money off chord. Its so direct then online shills come on these boards then make it sound like the other psu is what make chord qutest sound not even the DAC anymore. But their new custom psu they built is whats making the sound. Atleast ask fot permission before trying to make money off chord.
> 
> The other day i was looking for used amplofier then this guy pm me saying he is willing to sell it etc. It has 35 wpc SET amp 300B tubes so i was kinda intetested but ultimately decided not to then lo and behold after a few missed email he emails me from another account and turns out this amplifier is actually made by himself. The whilr time he playing it off as a 3rd person so much praise for the amp. Shills so many shills




The LPS 1.2 is much cleaner than my mains. I'm running LPS 1.2 -> Qutest -> BHSE -> Stax 007.

We all have different set-ups, we all hear things differently. YMMV.


----------



## x RELIC x

AlexB73 said:


> 2Qute is not bright at all. Actually it is very close to Mojo in term of tonal balance.
> I don't compare it to Hugo by myself, but all people who did it reported that 2Qute is not as bright as Hugo.



Ok.

Still, not what I was curious about.

Enjoy the music.


----------



## kovacs (May 19, 2018)

I've got mine for a week now, really happy with it, CD's have never sounded so good before. After years on head-fi I've discovered that I enjoy music much more when it's on a physical medium ( CD, LP ) and played through loudspeakers, so I have no interest in connecting it to a PC or playing high resolution files, or connecting it to a headphone amp. From some initial reviews I've read I was afraid that the Qutest would sound cold and clinical with CD's, but luckily that's not the case at all. I liked the sound from the first song I've played on it, but after a couple of days of operation the sound has improved even further. Some initial hardness or edginess disappeared after the first day of burn-in, after that I didn't notice any significant change in sound anymore. The Qutest now sounds well balanced and warm with great high frequency resolution and extension, instruments are very well separated ( even on some rather Lo-fi recordings ). I've also never heard such a deep soundstage and great imaging in my current room with my current speakers ( B&W 705S2 ) before, with the Qutest I'm now getting close to what I was able to get in my previous room, very impressive. PRaT ( pace, rhythm and timing ) is excellent as well since I can't seem to keep my feet still. The incisive filter hasn't yet sounded too bright to me ( my PrimaLuna tube amp may have something to do with that as well ) and other filters seem to lose some of the high frequency detail and extension that makes this DAC so special. I've also tried both optical and BNC digital feeds from the same source ( Cambridge Audio CXC ) and I prefer the RCA to BNC connection. So far I've only tried the 2v and 3 Volt output and I think I prefer 3 Volt, but I will need to do more tests to be sure. Still using the stock power supply, I've got easy access to medical grade Linear Power Supplies, so a nice 5V 1amp one is on it's way, I'll report back if I can hear a difference. I've used a similar one for my phono preamp and it made a huge difference. Very happy with my purchase so far.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Great review as before!


----------



## azabu

kovacs said:


> I've got mine for a week now, really happy with it, CD's have never sounded so good before. After years on head-fi I've discovered that I enjoy music much more when it's on a physical medium ( CD, LP ) and played through loudspeakers, so I have no interest in connecting it to a PC or playing high resolution files, or connecting it to a headphone amp. From some initial reviews I've read I was afraid that the Qutest would sound cold and clinical with CD's, but luckily that's not the case at all. I liked the sound from the first song I've played on it, but after a couple of days of operation the sound has improved even further. Some initial hardness or edginess disappeared after the first day of burn-in, after that I didn't notice any significant change in sound anymore. The Qutest now sounds well balanced and warm with great high frequency resolution and extension, instruments are very well separated ( even on some rather Lo-fi recordings ). I've also never heard such a deep soundstage and great imaging in my current room with my current speakers ( B&W 705S2 ) before, with the Qutest I'm now getting close to what I was able to get in my previous room, very impressive. PRaT ( pace, rhythm and timing is excellent as well since I can't seem to keep my feet still. The incisive filter hasn't yet sounded too bright to me ( my PrimaLuna tube amp may have something to do with that as well ) and other filters seem to loose some of the high frequency detail and extension that makes this DAC so special. I've also tried both optical and BNC digital feeds from the same source ( Cambridge Audio CXC ) and I prefer the RCA to BNC connection. So far I've only tried 2v and 3 Volt output and I think I prefer 3 Volt, but I will need to do more tests to be sure. Still using the stock power supply, I've got easy access to medical grade Linear Power Supplies, so a nice 5V 1amp one is on it's way, I'll report back if I can hear a difference. I've used a similar one for my phono preamp and it made a huge difference. Very happy with my purchase so far.



Congrats! I feel the same way. The Uptone JS-2 LPS is incoming tomorrow.

I'd be interested if anyone has tested the Qutest and Hugo 2 side by side. I auditioned the Hugo 2 today just with iems, and it's like an out of body experience afterwards. Very very clean, though to me it sounds like it lacks the subtle refinement of the Qutest, but then again I'm comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## andromeda1954

stevedlu said:


> I have listened to the Qutest extensively with the stock power supply($0),  ifi iPower 5v ($55) and the Uptone Audio UltraCap LPS-1.2. ($435)
> 
> iPower is the best, seconded by Stock and followed by UltraCap (waste of money)
> 
> ...


I used the iPower also and it sounded better than the stock supply. I also tried the Sbooster for a while with good results but not as good as the much cheaper IPower. The best results however I have with the use of the Ifi micro iUSB as power supply. This is not a cheap solution ,but it is in my constellation (Violectric V281, Qutest ,HD800S) the Golden Ratio and 
retrieves  everything from the Qutest 
and let's hear what the Qutest is capable of


----------



## soares (May 18, 2018)

Just arrived... I will report on my findings in 1 or 2 weeks time.
Meanwhile, I just discovered that the Qutest does not support native DSD at least with Linux (I am using a sonic transporter i5) and Mac. DSD over DoP goes up only to 256. However it acepts native  512 playback with specific windows drivers provided by Chord. My Oppo 205 does native 512 DSD. Any clues when and if we will get native DSD 512 with Linux and the Qutest? Thanks.


----------



## Zzt231gr

For you guys who had good results with ifi iPower;how does it compare sonically vs stock psu?Is it bigger and heavier physically?How did you connect it?


----------



## soares

Did not compare yet, but I got one. It's heavier and bigger (just a bit). You connect it with an adaptator, about 4$.


----------



## plsvn

soares said:


> You connect it with an adaptator, about 4$.



5v iPower (the one you need for the Qutest) already comes with a USB Mini adapter


----------



## soares

Ohhh, I didn't recall that. I am sorry. I bought my iFi more then 1 year ago, and I do not know where the adapters are...So I bought a new one.


----------



## dawktah2

I thought Qutest was going to have all around native DSD support. So far Synology drivers don't exist so using DoP.


----------



## soares

Unfortunately not. Some reviews mentioned that and I trusted them... Lesson learned...


----------



## dawktah2

soares said:


> Unfortunately not. Some reviews mentioned that and I trusted them... Lesson learned...



Me too


----------



## soares

dawktah2 said:


> Me too


Perhaps Robbs could clarify. Jesus on another threat replied saying this is due (in Linux) to a bad implementation of the standards. The true is that with the same Linux I can go up to native 512 DSD  using my OPPO 205.


----------



## Rob Watts

It supports native DSD via the ASIO driver (up to and including DSD 512) and DoP up to and including DSD 256. I don't know the situation re Linux...


----------



## Ultrainferno

On today's Picture Sunday, Linus previews the new Chord Electronics Qutest. Great pics and a first impression - What more do you want on a Sunday?

https://www.headfonia.com/picture-sunday-chord-qutest/


----------



## kovacs

I've experimented a little more with the output voltage, switching between 1v, 2v and 3 volts. The differences on my PrimaLuna tube amp are very small. I think I lose some top end detail and extension with the output set to 1 volt compared to 3 volt, but that's about it. 1 volt doesn't sound thin or bright, the overall sound signature stays the same. The output voltage also doesn't seem to significantly affect how loud the music sounds at a certain volume level on my amp, 1v sounds about as loud as 3v on my system, not exactly what I expected. Since the differences are so small and I can't hear any distortion or use more of the available range on my volume knob, I think it makes sense to use the strongest available output signal. Obviously this is amp dependend, but this works well for me.


----------



## miketlse

kovacs said:


> I've experimented a little more with the output voltage, switching between 1v, 2v and 3 volts. The differences on my PrimaLuna tube amp are very small. I think I lose some top end detail and extension with the output set to 1 volt compared to 3 volt, but that's about it. 1 volt doesn't sound thin or bright, the overall sound signature stays the same. The output voltage also doesn't seem to significantly affect how loud the music sounds at a certain volume level on my amp, 1v sounds about as loud as 3v on my system, not exactly what I expected. Since the differences are so small and I can't hear any distortion or use more of the available range on my volume knob, I think it makes sense to use the strongest available output signal. Obviously this is amp dependend, but this works well for me.


You have adopted the right approach.
On this thread, owners can post their suggestions as to which voltage to select, but ultimately the qutest owner has the opportunity to test each voltage, and identify which setting works best.


----------



## PanusKatus

If any UK members are interested, my Qutest is up for sale on eBay. I will consider realistic offers for quick(ish) sale.


----------



## Mrandrade (May 20, 2018)

[QUOTE = "PanusKatus, postagem: 14252226, membro: 467129"] Seja um membro do Reino Unido quando estiver interessado, meu Qutest estará à venda no eBay. Considerarei ofertas realistas para uma venda rápida


----------



## Mrandrade

How much?


----------



## PanusKatus

Mrandrade said:


> How much?



https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.co.uk/ulk/itm/183234642353

Hi. UK only, please. Cheers for enquiring.


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> It supports native DSD via the ASIO driver (up to and including DSD 512) and DoP up to and including DSD 256. I don't know the situation re Linux...



What platforms are the driver available for? I have a Synology server.


----------



## Rob Watts

I have been in contact with Matt from Chord, and as I suspected ASIO is windows only, so DSD is only DoP with Linux.


----------



## stevedlu

Zzt231gr said:


> For you guys who had good results with ifi iPower;how does it compare sonically vs stock psu?Is it bigger and heavier physically?How did you connect it?



First of all, the stock psu sounds FANTASTIC. It has a very lush tonal presentation, warmest of what i tried, i can see why they chose this for stock. ifi iPower 5v provides a much faster/precise and neutral sound. At this point you can go either way depending on taste and setup. (both same size & weight). Now the $400 uptone audio LPS 1.2..... dynamics are compressed, midrange becomes more distant, a sense of 3D is now flattened, I can see someone saying that this sounds more "analog" but to me it just sounds underpowered and noisy. I'm not bothering with a power bank because I do not want to deal with the use/recharge. 

To me the differences are not subtle or hard to hear. To those that yell "but Rob Watts Says the PSU doesnt matter!" the stock psu does in-fact sound great so have fun listening to a great DAC. For the rest...well I cant wait to try some more power supplies once I get bored and the "upgrade/change itch" sets in. 

Qutest>CMA600i>LCD-3


----------



## AlexB73 (May 21, 2018)

Anybody on this forum did update from 2qute to Qutest?


----------



## soares

Rob Watts said:


> It supports native DSD via the ASIO driver (up to and including DSD 512) and DoP up to and including DSD 256. I don't know the situation re Linux...


Thanks Rob. Unfortunately it does not help much from a Linux perspective. I guess that in order to have a future proof Dac, I need to have a Windows server or buy another Dac. What surprises me is that as far I know there is no problem to have native 512 DSD in Linux with other Dacs - I tried it with an OPPO 205. Why the Qutest implementation can just do DSD DoP?


----------



## soares

AlexB73 said:


> Anybody on this forum updated from 2qute to Qutest?


I did, but so far my impressions are still limited. I just got it last weekend. On the positive side, it's a huge jump in what concerns the soundstage and the separation of instruments. It's really a notable improvement. Great work! I reserve any possible negative comments after the burn-in.


----------



## stevedlu

soares said:


> Thanks Rob. Unfortunately it does not help much from a Linux perspective. I guess that in order to have a future proof Dac, I need to have a Windows server or buy another Dac. What surprises me is that as far I know there is no problem to have native 512 DSD in Linux with other Dacs - I tried it with an OPPO 205. Why the Qutest implementation can just do DSD DoP?



Isn't native DSD and DoP the same thing bit for bit? Just curious, where do you even get DSD 512 music?


----------



## soares

You're absolutely right. The same thing bit by bit. I apologise but I refuse to engage in any discussions about having or not 512 DSD files available, nor the advantages or inconvenients of using HQplayer to upsample to 256 or 512 DSD based on the argument that most Dave already to this with better results. Cheers.


----------



## stevedlu

soares said:


> You're absolutely right. The same thing bit by bit. I apologise but I refuse to engage in any discussions about having or not 512 DSD files available, nor the advantages or inconvenients of using HQplayer to upsample to 256 or 512 DSD based on the argument that most Dave already to this with better results. Cheers.



I was just curious. I have HQplayer and am very impressed by the DSD256 upsampling...


----------



## AlexB73

soares said:


> I did, but so far my impressions are still limited. I just got it last weekend. On the positive side, it's a huge jump in what concerns the soundstage and the separation of instruments. It's really a notable improvement. Great work! I reserve any possible negative comments after the burn-in.


Thank you.
It is interesting how the sound these devises will be compared after Qutest burn-in.


----------



## Rob Watts

soares said:


> Thanks Rob. Unfortunately it does not help much from a Linux perspective. I guess that in order to have a future proof Dac, I need to have a Windows server or buy another Dac. What surprises me is that as far I know there is no problem to have native 512 DSD in Linux with other Dacs - I tried it with an OPPO 205. Why the Qutest implementation can just do DSD DoP?



I was told by Chord (I did not do the USB drivers) that Linux requires different drivers for different servers to do native DSD. DoP is driverless.



stevedlu said:


> Isn't native DSD and DoP the same thing bit for bit? Just curious, where do you even get DSD 512 music?



Yes it's both the same DSD data, but DoP is less efficient - so we can only do DSD 256 with DoP. Native DSD USB protocol only transmits the data, not preambles and 8 bits of zero.

I have one DSD 512 track - and it suffers from the usual DSD SQ problems - flat soundstage, and unnaturally soft due to timing errors. Some like the softness that DSD adds.


----------



## soares (May 22, 2018)

stevedlu said:


> I was just curious. I have HQplayer and am very impressed by the DSD256 upsampling...


Yes, I do find the same results using
HQplayer. The Qutest is an amazing Dac, but the sound is even better using DSD256 with HQplayer. With the 2Qute I always had better results upsampling to PCM.
What I am afraid is that people using the more common upsampling with Roon might be disappointed as the DSD256 sounds flat despite being more sharp. They might consider that the problem comes from the Qutest - as I did first without trying the HQplayer - and definitely it is not the case. This difference with the DSD256 upsampling did not happened using for instance my Oppo 205. So please when upsampling to DSD with Roon, do not judge the Qutest. It is really a fantastic Dac!


----------



## JWahl

One last update from me for a while.  When trying to decide to whether to keep the iCan SE or the Massdrop CTH with the Qutest, I've decided on neither.  For awhile I was stuck exclusively on the Massdrop CTH because I felt like music was slightly more expressive and dynamic from it.  I decided to go back to the iCan and try it on 0 db gain with the Qutest on 3V output.  I felt like that was better preserving some of the micro details and expressiveness of the music.

Unfortunately, I made an impulse buy of another non-audio item (upgrading my Xbox One to Xbox One X) and thought I might need to end up selling my Qutest so I'm not holding too much credit card debt.  However, I couldn't bring myself to sell it.  Instead, I'm just going to sell both the amps, my Mojo, and maybe the iUSB, which will leave me ampless for a while.  Part of the problem is my dealer is taking forever to process my Elear RMA, so I've been sitting on a half-dead Elear for over 6 weeks that I can't sell.  So for a time period, I'll be exchanging my headphone hobby for my gaming hobby.

Later, I think I'm going to focus on stepping up a bit with the amp, while still keeping good value.  Considering my experience with the iCan, I'm now also looking at the HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk. 2.  I'd love to hear if anyone has experience with any of the newer Dynalo based amps with the Qutest.  One of the members here who reviewed the GL Mk2 used it with the Hugo 2 and Dave with positive results.


----------



## soares

Rob Watts said:


> I was told by Chord (I did not do the USB drivers) that Linux requires different drivers for different servers to do native DSD. DoP is driverless. (QUOTE)
> 
> Thank you again and my apologies for insisting. I just wanted to understand who might find a solution to have native DSD512 with Linux. Does your reply implies that  the guys behind my music server developed the drivers for the Oppo 205? Because what I was told is the following and I quote:
> *"vortecjr said:*
> ...


----------



## Majestiic

I just received my Qutest yesterday and so far I am loving it as its also my first Chord product. My question is there doesn't seem to be a power button on it so i was wondering if I am ok with just leaving it on 24/7 like my schiit dacs or if i should just disconnect it from the power supply? Thanks


----------



## jcn3

Majestiic said:


> I just received my Qutest yesterday and so far I am loving it as its also my first Chord product. My question is there doesn't seem to be a power button on it so i was wondering if I am ok with just leaving it on 24/7 like my schiit dacs or if i should just disconnect it from the power supply? Thanks



Leave it on - won't hurt it.


----------



## Joe-Siow

These came in today. Set it up and they sound amazing with the Qutest.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Joe-Siow said:


> These came in today. Set it up and they sound amazing with the Qutest.


They seem great.Any pics without grill and further?Do I see acoustic treatment behind?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Zzt231gr said:


> They seem great.Any pics without grill and further?Do I see acoustic treatment behind?



Here goes. Simple diffusers at the back. I oughta get some bass traps too.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Joe-Siow said:


> Here goes. Simple diffusers at the back. I oughta get some bass traps too.


Wow!Sexy.

You better put those diffusers behind you.They are useless at that point.And the best bung for your money would be side wall absorption.Enjoy!


----------



## Zzt231gr (May 24, 2018)

Just got this for my PS4 connection.Anyone has experience with it?


----------



## plsvn

"Ultimate" is what they call a gold plated *optical* cable?
*Useless* is what I'd rather call gold plating this kind of cable


----------



## kovacs (May 29, 2018)

So I have been listening to my Chord Qutest with a nice Linear Power Supply ( heavy medical grade LPS with two 5V 1A outputs ) for a couple of days now, it definitely sounds different. Whereas the differences between 1V/3V and optical/coax were pretty small, the LPS had a much bigger impact on the sound. I will certainly be able to tell them apart in a Blind test. I started listening after the LPS had been on for about 6 hours and the sound was terrible, bass was gone, it sounded cold and bright and the soundstage was less deep, with sound seemingly stuck to the loudspeakers. Yesterday I listened again and the gap was certainly smaller, but still I much prefer the sound with the stock power supply. Later today I will give the LPS one more chance to redeem itself, but if it sounds like yesterday I will switch back to the stock power supply. Maybe the power from the LPS is less clean than the stock power supply or maybe 1A is not powerful enough, I don't know. According to Chord the quality of the power supply shouldn't have an impact on the sound quality but it definitely did in my system. Feel free to try one for yourself, maybe you will have better luck, but I would strongly advice to buy from a shop that has a solid return policy. I'm going to keep it powered on for another week before I will decide to send it back or not.

So my observations ( and preferences ) so far are:
- BNC > Optical ( from the same source )
- 3V > 1V ( with my amp )
- Stock power supply >>> LPS
- Incisive neutral filter > other filters
- Burn-in has a significant effect on sound 
- Burn-in time is no more than 24h


----------



## Rob Watts

Actually my advice is that the supplied PSU is as good as a battery supply (based on my listening with my set-up -YMMV) - which gives the lowest amount of RF noise - and that LPS supplies is likely to sound worse, as they are often transparent to RF noise from the mains - the supplied switcher has RF filters. My advice is to try a USB battery bank, and if it sounds identical to the supplied PSU, then don't bother "upgrading" with a LPS... 

The hard bright sound is characteristic of more random RF noise entering your system, creating more noise floor modulation, which makes it sound brighter, and if bad, harder and grainy.


----------



## kovacs (May 24, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Actually my advice is that the supplied PSU is as good as a battery supply (based on my listening with my set-up -YMMV) - which gives the lowest amount of RF noise - and that LPS supplies is likely to sound worse, as they are often transparent to RF noise from the mains - the supplied switcher has RF filters. My advice is to try a USB battery bank, and if it sounds identical to the supplied PSU, then don't bother "upgrading" with a LPS...
> 
> The hard bright sound is characteristic of more random RF noise entering your system, creating more noise floor modulation, which makes it sound brighter, and if bad, harder and grainy.



Thank you for your reply ! You have said that and I should have listened.

In my defence in the interview with Dan George in Hi-fi choice it was worded differently: " Like it's predecessor, the 2Qute, our digital consultant Rob Watts spent a long time designing the internal power filtering and regulation so that the external power supply could not influence the sound."

Still in both versions you adviced us not to change the stock power supply, will try an external power bank but honestly I'm in no hurry.

I think you designed an amazing device and from the things that we can change, power output voltage, inputs and filters none had any significant impact on the sound quality, it's only when I made an external change the sound signature changed dramatically.

I'm now going to enjoy the Qutest like you designed it, with the stock power supply.


----------



## rhern213

I'm looking to possibly pick up a Qutest and had a question, is there any benefit at all to using the Qutest over using the Hugo2 just as a DAC? Is there maybe a better implementation of the input modules or some processing changes that would give the Qutest a slight edge over the Hugo2 as a DAC only?

I'm probably not going to be taking the device anywhere as it's for a home headphone system, but if I can get the Hugo2 at a discount for not too much more I would rather have the capability of the Hugo2.


----------



## Clemmaster

The Qutest has a galvanically isolated USB input, which should sound better.


----------



## jayz

Zzt231gr said:


> Wow!Sexy.
> 
> You better put those diffusers behind you.They are useless at that point.And the best bung for your money would be side wall absorption.Enjoy!



Without knowing the depth of the room it would be unwise to dismiss it as useless. 

Anyway, I would recommend isotek's system setup cd to anyone looking to evaluate the effectiveness of their room treatment. http://www.isoteksystems.com/products/essentials/ultimate-system-set-up-disc/ Unless of course they have access to better tools specifically designed to optimise room acoustics.


----------



## Rhinomyte76 (May 24, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Actually my advice is that the supplied PSU is as good as a battery supply (based on my listening with my set-up -YMMV) - which gives the lowest amount of RF noise - and that LPS supplies is likely to sound worse, as they are often transparent to RF noise from the mains - the supplied switcher has RF filters. My advice is to try a USB battery bank, and if it sounds identical to the supplied PSU, then don't bother "upgrading" with a LPS...
> 
> The hard bright sound is characteristic of more random RF noise entering your system, creating more noise floor modulation, which makes it sound brighter, and if bad, harder and grainy.



Thank you Rob!!! 

My issue of discontent with the Qutest was the brightness that I was getting.  I was using an Ifi IUSB 3.0 for power which incorporates the Ifi Ipower, which was then plugged into a power conditioner.  After all the swapping back and forth with cables etc, I kept the power part of the chain because I thought that normal budget looking plug couldn't possibly produce power as nice and clean as my setup.  

After seeing your post, I tried it out, and brightness is at normal levels. The change was not subtle at all.  Like night and day.  Back that to the sound signature that made me love my headphones. Toes now can't stop tapping.  Thanks!


----------



## Zzt231gr

jayz said:


> Without knowing the depth of the room it would be unwise to dismiss it as useless.
> 
> Anyway, I would recommend isotek's system setup cd to anyone looking to evaluate the effectiveness of their room treatment. http://www.isoteksystems.com/products/essentials/ultimate-system-set-up-disc/ Unless of course they have access to better tools specifically designed to optimise room acoustics.


Diffusers seldomly work below 400hz and they are useless at rear first reflection point.You are right about the rear part of the room though...I haven't seen it-just guessing.


----------



## kovacs (May 25, 2018)

I still can't believe how much different the Chord Qutest sounds with the stock power supply compared to my Linear power supply, a medical grade low noise power supply from Vitec, made and designed in Germany. The difference is big and immediately noticeable. This tells me that the power does affect the sound quality ( maybe more than Chord would like to admit ). Maybe I chose the worst linear power supply in the world for this application, but I don't think so, this thing is build like a tank, is very heavy and wasn't cheap either. The Qutest with the stock power supply doesn't sound bright or sterile, not even a tiny bit. The first thing I notice with the LPS isn't even the brightness, it's the lack of bass and the reduced soundstage and instrument separation. I'm currently using the Qutest in my main loudspeaker based system and I literally can't believe how good the soundstage is, just wan't possible in this room before. I paid a lot of attention to speaker placement and room treatment but a big portion of my roof is glas and one of the speakers is next to a big metal radiator, hardly ideal and still the soundstage is now more than respectable. Right now I'm listening to Radiohead's latest album and it sounds amazing, it's very hard staying concentrated writing this. Earlier today I listened to Al Green's album Call Me, Illmatic by Nas, Crescent by John Coltrane and even some Daft Punk and I can't find any fault with the sound, this is exactly what I was looking for to upgrade my system. I'm trying to find an album that sounds compressed or messy  but so far it has handled everything with easy, Verdi's Requiem or Igg Pop no problem. This DAC has an uncanny ability to unravel the most complex music and somehow make sense of it all. Music just flows, rythm is excellent and it's hard to keep my feet still. This is honestly one of the best purchases I've made in years and that LPS is already back on it's way to Germany. 

If you've never listened to the Chord Qutest with the stock power supply definitely give it try, you may be surprised !


----------



## andromeda1954

review of the Qutest
https://downloads.artsexcellence.nl/reviews/chord.qutest.artsexcellence.english.pdf


----------



## soares

kovacs said:


> I still can't believe how much different the Chord Qutest sounds with the stock power supply compared to my Linear power supply, a medical grade low noise power supply from Vitec, made and designed in Germany. The difference is big and immediately noticeable. This tells me that the power does make a big difference ( maybe more than Chord would like to admit ). Maybe I chose the worst linear power supply in the world for this application, but I don't think so, this thing is build like a tank, is very heavy and wasn't cheap either. The Qutest with the stock power supply doesn't sound bright or sterile, not even a tiny bit. The first thing I notice with the LPS isn't even the brightness, it's the lack of bass and the reduced soundstage and instrument separation. I'm currently using the Qutest in my main loudspeaker based system and I literally can't believe how good the soundstage is, just wan't possible in this room before. I paid a lot of attention to speaker placement and room treatment but a big portion of my roof is glas and one of the speakers is next to a big metal radiator, hardly ideal and still the soundstage is now more than respectable. Right now I'm listening to Radiohead's latest album and it sounds amazing, it's very hard staying concentrated writing this. Earlier today I listened to Al Green's album Call Me, Illmatic by Nas, Crescent by John Coltrane and even some Daft Punk and I can't find any fault with the sound, this is exactly what I was looking for to upgrade my system. I'm trying to find an album that sounds compressed or messy  but so far it has handled everything with easy, Verdi's Requiem or Igg Pop no problem. This DAC has an uncanny ability to unravel the most complex music and somehow make sense of it all. Music just flows, rythm is excellent and it's hard to keep my feet still. This is honestly one of the best purchases I've made in years and that LPS is already back on it's way to Germany.
> 
> If you've never listened to the Chord Qutest with the stock power supply definitely give it try, you may be surprised !


Will you share with us the reference of the LPS you are using. Tks.


----------



## kovacs

soares said:


> Will you share with us the reference of the LPS you are using. Tks.



Sorry they don’t sell to consumers, they only sell to medical labs and hospitals. Plus it was terrible, nobody will prefer this sound over the stock power supply.


----------



## Zzt231gr (May 26, 2018)

kovacs said:


> I still can't believe how much different the Chord Qutest sounds with the stock power supply compared to my Linear power supply, a medical grade low noise power supply from Vitec, made and designed in Germany. The difference is big and immediately noticeable. This tells me that the power does affect the sound quality ( maybe more than Chord would like to admit ). Maybe I chose the worst linear power supply in the world for this application, but I don't think so, this thing is build like a tank, is very heavy and wasn't cheap either. The Qutest with the stock power supply doesn't sound bright or sterile, not even a tiny bit. The first thing I notice with the LPS isn't even the brightness, it's the lack of bass and the reduced soundstage and instrument separation. I'm currently using the Qutest in my main loudspeaker based system and I literally can't believe how good the soundstage is, just wan't possible in this room before. I paid a lot of attention to speaker placement and room treatment but a big portion of my roof is glas and one of the speakers is next to a big metal radiator, hardly ideal and still the soundstage is now more than respectable. Right now I'm listening to Radiohead's latest album and it sounds amazing, it's very hard staying concentrated writing this. Earlier today I listened to Al Green's album Call Me, Illmatic by Nas, Crescent by John Coltrane and even some Daft Punk and I can't find any fault with the sound, this is exactly what I was looking for to upgrade my system. I'm trying to find an album that sounds compressed or messy  but so far it has handled everything with easy, Verdi's Requiem or Igg Pop no problem. This DAC has an uncanny ability to unravel the most complex music and somehow make sense of it all. Music just flows, rythm is excellent and it's hard to keep my feet still. This is honestly one of the best purchases I've made in years and that LPS is already back on it's way to Germany.
> 
> If you've never listened to the Chord Qutest with the stock power supply definitely give it try, you may be surprised !


IMHO medical equipment is way overpriced.They are built to last but that doesn't mean they are the best design topology.

BTW,do you find Crescent bass heavy?I own a 2007 CD version and it is heavier on bass than the plethora of my CDs.


----------



## Zzt231gr

andromeda1954 said:


> review of the Qutest
> https://downloads.artsexcellence.nl/reviews/chord.qutest.artsexcellence.english.pdf


So what the heck is going on with PSUs?Opinions differ and we don't have a clear answer.

Would it be wise to trust forum reviews and not reviewers?


----------



## agedbest

kovacs said:


> Sorry they don’t sell to consumers, they only sell to medical labs and hospitals. Plus it was terrible, nobody will prefer this sound over the stock power supply.



wrong direction........

if you want ....try this http://www.isoteksystems.com/products/performance/evo3-aquarius/

garantied you hear much more and well

Chord PSU is for lower the price of unit only...if they add a better PSU Qutest is out of price....
add the price of good LPS, IFI micro or better, and see the market.


----------



## dolphy007

PSU discussion = whipping a dead horse

The designer has stated that the provided PSU is the best to use  End of story  move on!

Third party PSU will also void your warranty.


----------



## Light - Man

dolphy007 said:


> PSU discussion = whipping a *dead horse*
> 
> The designer has stated that the provided PSU is the best to use  End of story * move on!*
> 
> Third party PSU will also void your warranty.



Yes Guys, please move on, a bit like this?

Perhaps let's get back to talking about burn-in, etc.


----------



## Leogaluc666

Hello,

Something weird is happening with my qutest,
When powered on, when I rub my hands against it ( the metal body)I feel like there is some kind of electrical current, this sensation stops when I turn it off, is it normal ? 

Ps : it doesn't happen with other dac and I tried in different location of my house.


----------



## miketlse

Leogaluc666 said:


> Hello,
> 
> Something weird is happening with my qutest,
> When powered on, when I rub my hands against it ( the metal body)I feel like there is some kind of electrical current, this sensation stops when I turn it off, is it normal ?
> ...


It looks like you have the same issue as this post.


----------



## plsvn

dolphy007 said:


> Third party PSU will also void your warranty.



would you please give us a link to where you have read this?
it was indeed written in *2Qute’s* manual but I can’t find anything in Qutest’s manual nor Chord website


----------



## dawktah2

plsvn said:


> would you please give us a link to where you have read this?
> it was indeed written in *2Qute’s* manual but I can’t find anything in Qutest’s manual nor Chord website



I believe Mr. Watts stated earlier in this thread that only applied to 2Qute. Qutest has standard usb 5v. 

Please lets end the PSU discussion.


----------



## dbq5anlxj (May 26, 2018)

anyone compared this with rme adi-2 dac? My amp is v281 and hp is hd800s. I don't know which dac will be a better pair with v281 and hd800s.


----------



## agedbest

dolphy007 said:


> PSU discussion = whipping a dead horse
> 
> The designer has stated that the provided PSU is the best to use  End of story  move on!
> 
> Third party PSU will also void your warranty.







assuming that you already own a good amplification system and speakers ....note... better is system, and more you can hear difference.....no cable has so tangible improvement

there are two things only, that would bring about improvement of system

1) clean power source

2) good digital source


.... so I would not rule out having to talk about power source yet.


about the warranty ... it's the same manufacturer that recommends, as alternative choice, a powerbank for...., battery pack is not best choice, because  the batteries inside have voltage of 3.7v, then by a switching DC / DC converting circuitry,
without any filter, it exit at 5V, but try it if you want. for this I would not worry about warranty...


I have not seen any online video review that used the Qutest with factory PSU.

therefore I am not the only one to think that it is not made for best performance, but it turn on the system anyway....


do not worry, you can always use it to turn on led lights of a small Christmas tree.


if you still do not believe it ...... take as reference the high end DAC of Chord or other firm, tell me you see something as Qutest PSU.

instead you can easily find DACs that use it under $ 400 / $ 500 range, over $ 700 nobody uses a few dollars PSU, but best power source for DAC price range.


----------



## maxxevv

@Rob Watts , the designer for the Qutest has already spoken on this. 

You actually believe you know better than he does ?


----------



## Currawong

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> No it dosent. Stop saying other psu sound better when chord themselves said it dosent. Beside if chord qutest goes bad for whatevet reason while you have different psu plugged in it voids warranty the second you plug in that different psu.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Shills so many shills



A shill is someone who works for a company in underhanded way, promoting their products while pretending to have no connection. I usually see this accusation levelled against Head-Fi members by people jealous of the hard work that resulted in the site's continued success. I suggest if you think that the forums are "full of shills" as is often suggested that you log out and never return, even to read the site.

More usefully on topic: Rob suggested on the Hugo 2 thread that some power supplies would add more noise to the system on the power end which might be picked up by the amplifier. The other thing to consider is when someone says that a change makes the sound "better" is that they are not hearing a change for the better, but for the worse, such as distortion adding false detail.



soares said:


> Just arrived... I will report on my findings in 1 or 2 weeks time.
> Meanwhile, I just discovered that the Qutest does not support native DSD at least with Linux (I am using a sonic transporter i5) and Mac. DSD over DoP goes up only to 256. However it acepts native  512 playback with specific windows drivers provided by Chord. My Oppo 205 does native 512 DSD. Any clues when and if we will get native DSD 512 with Linux and the Qutest? Thanks.



DSD512 requires quite serious bandwidth, among other factors.



soares said:


> I guess that in order to have a future proof Dac



There is no future with DSD512. The storage and bandwidth required are just insane, even now, for zero benefit. In 10 years, I'm SURE they will still be insane.


----------



## agedbest

it not the first time Rob Watt spoken about PSU, and you may be don't know the story....


please google it before speak about .....is old story about Qute, QuteHD, 2Qute, and now Qutest


and always said the same: the best PSU possible.


to be punctually contradicted by the facts.


unfortunately it is a commercial choice.


----------



## Triode User

agedbest said:


> it not the first time Rob Watt spoken about PSU, and you may be don't know the story....
> please google it before speak about .....is old story about Qute, QuteHD, 2Qute, and now Qutest
> and always said the same: the best PSU possible.
> to be punctually contradicted by the facts.
> unfortunately it is a commercial choice.



People will have to make their own minds up about the possible sound improvement (or worsening) by using aftermarket power supplies but anyone attempting to take anything from reports posted on here or elsewhere needs to realise that many people are not experienced to know when what they hear and like is actually a technically inferior sound but with false detail or space etc added by RF / EMI due to the aftermarket power supply. 

Also, it should be realised that Rob Watts is a completely separate consultant who has consistently put forward his own judgment and assessments irrespective of commercial considerations. Chord may or may not be making commercial decisions as you suggest but personally I trust Rob Watts to tell it like it is and how he sees it in an unbiased way. 

Lastly, you talk about facts but what you really mean is personal opinions. Please accept that there is an amount of YMMV in all this.


----------



## SearchOfSub

agedbest said:


> assuming that you already own a good amplification system and speakers ....note... better is system, and more you can hear difference.....no cable has so tangible improvement
> 
> there are two things only, that would bring about improvement of system
> 
> ...





Currawong said:


> A shill is someone who works for a company in underhanded way, promoting their products while pretending to have no connection. I usually see this accusation levelled against Head-Fi members by people jealous of the hard work that resulted in the site's continued success. I suggest if you think that the forums are "full of shills" as is often suggested that you log out and never return, even to read the site.
> 
> More usefully on topic: Rob suggested on the Hugo 2 thread that some power supplies would add more noise to the system on the power end which might be picked up by the amplifier. The other thing to consider is when someone says that a change makes the sound "better" is that they are not hearing a change for the better, but for the worse, such as distortion adding false detail.
> 
> ...




wow that was out of nowhere lol.


----------



## SearchOfSub (May 27, 2018)

Stop buying these aftermarket PSU's. It will void your warranty. If somehow the DAC goes bad for whatever reason, you will not be covered just becauae you used aftermarket PSU.

These guys are complete leechers trying to make a buck off anything. I would NOT support them at all. These guys are scandalous enough to start manufacturing these custom Chord PSU cables as their new bussiness project without Chords consent. 
Now do you think the same minds will have the least bit of honesty to use quality parts and price it right? Absolutely not.


----------



## agedbest

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> These guys are complete leechers trying to make a buck off anything. I would NOT support them at all. These guys are scandalous enough to start manufacturing these custom Chord PSU cables as their new bussiness project without Chords consent.
> Now do you think the same minds will have the least bit of honesty to use quality parts and price it right? Absolutely not.




you accuse me of what?

to have interests in the sale of WHAT?

Please reply me is you see something like Qutest PSU in a DAC priced over 700 $


----------



## agedbest

pay attention at minute 8.10 and later

when the reviewer show the system and hear well about what he said

it is my opinion too


----------



## Currawong

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> Stop buying these aftermarket PSU's. It will void your warranty. If somehow the DAC goes bad for whatever reason, you will not be covered just becauae you used aftermarket PSU.



The manual specifies a 5V 1A power supply at minimum. It doesn't specify that the Chord provided PSU must be used. That is why it uses a micro USB port as the power supply. Nothing about aftermarket power supplies and warranty is mentioned anywhere by Chord.


----------



## plsvn (May 28, 2018)

HeadphoneGuy101 said:


> Stop buying these aftermarket PSU's. It will void your warranty.



once more: point us to an official Chord's statement of the above *re the Qutest* or stop misleading people with just your personal beliefs


----------



## KevinjKim (May 28, 2018)

Hey Everyone ~ I’m not even sure if I’m posting this properly or if I’m just replying a post about PSU???
 I just bought the Qutest and I’ve been using it for about over a week and I just wanted to know how I can get the most out of the DAC. I’m quite new to the hifi or the audiophile world and my curiosity has been making me spend $$$...  I just hope it doesn’t get any worse ...  Anyways, I’m currently running a Bakoon 5210 MK3 preAmp?  With the Qutest and using a DAP from AK, the SP1000.  I’ve been converting wave files to DSD and 24 bit 192 kHz files from FLAC / dBpoweramp Music Converter etc .  I first convert the source from YouTube to a MP3 converter online and I’m not even too sure if I’m actually converting it into DSD, FLAC OR 24/32 bit quality.  The music quality sounds good to me but if there’s another way, a better way, I would very much appreciate your advice.
Well, back to the Qutest ... I’m currently running it by hooking up my SP1000 to an optical cable to the Qutest.  I tried a usb-b / usb-c type cable but the quality seems better with an optical cable.  [ maybe it’s becasue I was using a usb-c adapter to the usb input ] Not sure ~  Does the selectable option filter [ incisive neutral [grey] / HF roll-off [green] / warm [orange] / HF roll-off [red] ] only work when the DAP is hooked up to the usb-b type cable to the Qutest?  I’m not hearing any differences in the music when using the filters.  I’m also using an iMac and the PINE player app from the Mac.  Is there a better way??? 

Your input on this matter will be very much appreciated ~

Kevin K from Seoul


----------



## plsvn

no matter what you convert it to, if you start from MP3 files the best you'll get is... MP3 quality, sorry


----------



## KevinjKim

Is there another way to get DSD quality music?  subscribe to tidal? or other music streaming sites?


----------



## plsvn (May 28, 2018)

buy DSD files (NativeDSD.com is a reputable source) or SACDs and play those
you can also rip SACDs but... that's a long story (how-to thread on CA)

no streaming service offers DSD quality


----------



## KevinjKim

thank you ~^^


----------



## KevinjKim

plsvn said:


> buy DSD files (NativeDSD.com is a reputable source) or SACDs and play those
> you can also rip SACDs but... that's a long story (how-to thread on CA)
> 
> no streaming service offers DSD quality


thank you~ sorry I'm new to this


----------



## Leogaluc666

192kbps from yt converted to dsd played on a sp1000 and a qutest, a little part of me died today.


----------



## KevinjKim

Leogaluc666 said:


> 192kbps from yt converted to dsd played on a sp1000 and a qutest, a little part of me died today.


Thank you I've tried converting using ytmp3 converter if that's what meant.  but I was just told that its still just mp3 quality music~


----------



## KevinjKim

KevinjKim said:


> Thank you I've tried converting using ytmp3 converter if that's what meant.  but I was just told that its still just mp3 quality music~


By the way~ I'm loving the Focal Utopia's I thought the French were famous for everything except for electronics but I was very, very wrong~


----------



## kovacs (May 28, 2018)

KevinjKim said:


> Hey Everyone ~ I’m not even sure if I’m posting this properly or if I’m just replying a post about PSU???
> I just bought the Qutest and I’ve been using it for about over a week and I just wanted to know how I can get the most out of the DAC. I’m quite new to the hifi or the audiophile world and my curiosity has been making me spend $$$...  I just hope it doesn’t get any worse ...  Anyways, I’m currently running a Bakoon 5210 MK3 preAmp?  With the Qutest and using a DAP from AK, the SP1000.  I’ve been converting wave files to DSD and 24 bit 192 kHz files from FLAC / dBpoweramp Music Converter etc .  I first convert the source from YouTube to a MP3 converter online and I’m not even too sure if I’m actually converting it into DSD, FLAC OR 24/32 bit quality.  The music quality sounds good to me but if there’s another way, a better way, I would very much appreciate your advice.
> Well, back to the Qutest ... I’m currently running it by hooking up my SP1000 to an optical cable to the Qutest.  I tried a usb-b / usb-c type cable but the quality seems better with an optical cable.  [ maybe it’s becasue I was using a usb-c adapter to the usb input ] Not sure ~  Does the selectable option filter [ incisive neutral [grey] / HF roll-off [green] / warm [orange] / HF roll-off [red] ] only work when the DAP is hooked up to the usb-b type cable to the Qutest?  I’m not hearing any differences in the music when using the filters.  I’m also using an iMac and the PINE player app from the Mac.  Is there a better way???
> 
> ...



Man, no offense but if think that the songs ripped from youtube sound good and you can’t hear a difference between the different filters you won’t hear a difference between power supplies. Relax, stop buying equipment and start listening to your system. We all had to start somewhere but you are going way too fast. Turn the lights of, close your eyes and listen to well recorded music that you are familiar with and get to know your system. Try to describe the sound of your system, does it sound bright or warm, how is the soundstage, do you feel like the sound is coming from the loudspeakers or between and behind the speakers, how far behind ? How hard is it to follow the different instruments in a song, does it sound like a mess or can you easily follow a particular instrument or singer ? Do instruments or voices sound real or artificial ? Compare the version from youtube with a Lossless version ( CD, Tidal,... ) what do you hear ? Don’t buy any new gear before you can answer these questions and if you can’t you need to find another hobby and spend your money elsewhere. Your gear is more than capable, but you’ve got a long way to go my friend. Good luck and have fun !


----------



## SearchOfSub

Currawong said:


> The manual specifies a 5V 1A power supply at minimum. It doesn't specify that the Chord provided PSU must be used. That is why it uses a micro USB port as the power supply. Nothing about aftermarket power supplies and warranty is mentioned anywhere by Chord.




It was mentioned many times on Poly thread and original Hugo thread. John Franks clearly said warranty is voided if Chord products are used by aftermarket PSU.

These aftermarket PSU is not made yesterday. It goes back to Chord Qute days.


----------



## soares (Jun 7, 2018)

You are very welcome not to upsample your Redbook files. It really a matter of personal choice/system dependent and again I won't discuss it. It's pointless. I do have other views and I am really upset due to the fact that I can not go over DSD256, when I could do it with other DAC using the same Linux. But the worst is that after countless hours changing USB cables, tubes, etc, I have not solved the problem that I mentioned earlier when upsampling to DSD256 or PCM768. The white noise continue to show up randomly and I fail to see why. With my 2 other DAC (OPPO 205 and iFi Nano) and using the same streamer and server (Sonic transporter i5 and Ultrarendu) + HQplayer, I don't get any white noise, ever. This being said I promised to share with you my views on the Qutest. First the power supply. I've tried the stock one, the iFi and the HDPlex. To my surprise, the differences are very subtle and you do not notice them immediately. Not sure if I will further invest on an Sbooster as I did with my 2Qute. Second, some of you asked me if you should upgrade from the 2Qute.I would say yes. The Qutest is really a gem. Sound stage, separation of instruments, timing. So much has been written about it and so eloquently that I will will refrain from saying more. A word on the tonality. I find it a little bit less warm than the 2Qute and also the voices seem a little bit more recessed when you compare to it or specifically to the Oppo205. It's a matter of preferences. As a curiosity when I was trying to see if the white noise could come from a tube, I noticed with surprise that contrary to the other DAC I had, and including also other CD players (e.g. my Sony XA9000ES) the sound didn't differ much... Do not have a clue why. To conclude I would recommend it without reserve to anyone that is looking for a excellent DAC to play Redbook files. Unfortunately I can not say the same regarding upsampling due to the white noise. I can not comment on original  high resolution files because I haven't tried yet. Cheers and enjoy your Qutest.

Edit (06.07.2018)

Just to share some additional views:
i) It is clear now that I prefer the stock power supply.
ii) The white noise when upsampling through HQplayer seems to have stopped with the new NAA upgrade.


----------



## Currawong

SearchOfSub said:


> It was mentioned many times on Poly thread and original Hugo thread. John Franks clearly said warranty is voided if Chord products are used by aftermarket PSU.
> 
> These aftermarket PSU is not made yesterday. It goes back to Chord Qute days.



I did a search for "warranty" in posts by @Mojo ideas (who may wish to clarify things) and found no mention of warranty voiding in the 12 results I found, except when someone suggested they open up their own unit. If you know of an official post or instruction where it is stated that you cannot use other than the chord charger with any of their products that use micro USB for charging, please link it here.

With the Hugo (original, not Hugo 2) it does NOT use USB for charging, but a specific charger. Many people fried their units plugging in the wrong charger as it uses a common plug. 

Again, the use of micro USB, as with the thousands of devices out there that are the same, implies that any 5V charger with sufficient current (at least 1A as specified in the manual) will be OK to use.


----------



## KevinjKim

kovacs said:


> Man, no offense but if think that the songs ripped from youtube sound good and you can’t hear a difference between the different filters you won’t hear a difference between power supplies. Relax, stop buying equipment and start listening to your system. We all had to start somewhere but you are going way too fast. Turn the lights of, close your eyes and listen to well recorded music that you are familiar with and get to know your system. Try to describe the sound of your system, does it sound bright or warm, how is the soundstage, do you feel like the sound is coming from the loudspeakers or between and behind the speakers, how far behind ? How hard is it to follow the different instruments in a song, does it sound like a mess or can you easily follow a particular instrument or singer ? Do instruments or voices sound real or artificial ? Compare the version from youtube with a Lossless version ( CD, Tidal,... ) what do you hear ? Don’t buy any new gear before you can answer these questions and if you can’t you need to find another hobby and spend your money elsewhere. Your gear is more than capable, but you’ve got a long way to go my friend. Good luck and have fun !


Thanks will do that tonight ~ thanks for the recommendation ~


----------



## AlexB73

*soares*
Thank you for 2Qute vs Qutest comparison.
I listen only CD and Vinyl. No streaming, DCD, TDAL and other stuff like this.
I have 2000+ CD and 600+ LP collection. Mostly classical and jazz. I also have ~300 rock music CDs and LPs.
I use 2Qute with Cary 303 CD player as transport connected with coaxial cable.
Do you enjoy to listen vocal thought Qutest?
Which kind of music do you listen?


----------



## soares

Mostly jazz and classical Alex. I must say that the impact I felt most was  when listening to classical music. Vocal are indeed wonderful but I had preferred to have them a little "more on my face" as the Oppo205 does. I am sorry but I can not comment  on the sound coming from the coax as I only used it with USB. If I find time I will compare it to the sound of my Oppo205 as only a transport. Cheers.


----------



## plsvn (May 29, 2018)

SearchOfSub said:


> It was mentioned many times on Poly thread and original Hugo thread. John Franks clearly said warranty is voided if Chord products are used by aftermarket PSU.



Customers are not expected to follow every forum and read every interview, post, comment, review whatever out there!

Warranty voiding by using third party PSUs has to be written on product manual or official web pages (they don't even *have to* read web pages: it has to be on the manual that comes with the product itself)
This was the case for 2Qute but it is **NOT** for Qutest


----------



## AlexB73

I compared 2Qute with:
1. Macbook Pro 13" with Amarra and Audioquest Carbon USB cable
versus
2. Cary 303 as transport.

Cary is just OK transport but it over-performed my Mac setup by miles.


----------



## Zzt231gr

AlexB73 said:


> I compared 2Qute with:
> 1. Macbook Pro 13" with Amarra and Audioquest Carbon USB cable
> versus
> 2. Cary 303 as transport.
> ...


Seems like you've got a very nice cd player!Have you compared it with a dedicated transport?Do you think it would worth the upgrade?


----------



## AlexB73 (May 29, 2018)

I bought Cary 303 CD player in 2001. It costed $3000.
I don't want to spend money for a new transport right now.
I just put SR Red fuse inside Cary and use Cardas wooden blocks under the player.
One my friend told me that old Linn CD players should be better as transport. But I never tried one of them.


----------



## jayz

On the subject of reducing interference using ferrite rings, I have been experimenting with Qutest and discovered... lo and behold there is indeed an improvement to be derived. Now before this explodes into an unnecessary argument I have to clarify that the effects of Ferrites on cables (particularly digital cables) is an accepted phenomenon on Headfi and Chord threads in general. Have to clarify that I do not see this as an issue with Qutest but rather a weakness with the EMI RFI polluted environments we live in these days. Therefore it is an ideal opportunity for improvement should one chose to explore and experiment. Phew, with that out of the way, here is what I have done... 

I got myself two packs of Dreamtop Ferrite rings (various sizes) and went about attaching to cables. Reading the Dave thread, I came to realise that maximum impact requires attaching to coax cable so initially attached one each to both ends but later increased that to two each end. Then the usb power cable to Qutest. Then other power cables used in the system short of analog line and speaker cables as they can be sensitive to cable inductance change. Even made a few windings of Ethernet cable (feeding my source) around largest ferrite cores and post-tested with the player's network test that it is still capable of the peak bandwidth expected.

The result is noticeable but not in the way I had first imagined because the Qutest is extremely quiet anyway so it is not just about a quieter static background but now, transients are well.. better transients in that you could almost end up startled with dynamic peaks particularly in orchestral pieces.

BTW I got myself the http://www.chesky.com/album/ultimate-demonstration-disc-ud95 and what a disc it is and to imagine they did this in 1996. The dynamics test (track29) is one of the best tracks I have ever heard - if you want to listen to what your system can do in terms of dynamic peaks. I am discovering Qutest's capabilities every day, what a DAC this is.


----------



## Zzt231gr

jayz said:


> On the subject of reducing interference using ferrite rings, I have been experimenting with Qutest and discovered... lo and behold there is indeed an improvement to be derived. Now before this explodes into an unnecessary argument I have to clarify that the effects of Ferrites on cables (particularly digital cables) is an accepted phenomenon on Headfi and Chord threads in general. Have to clarify that I do not see this as an issue with Qutest but rather a weakness with the EMI RFI polluted environments we live in these days. Therefore it is an ideal opportunity for improvement should one chose to explore and experiment. Phew, with that out of the way, here is what I have done...
> 
> I got myself two packs of Dreamtop Ferrite rings (various sizes) and went about attaching to cables. Reading the Dave thread, I came to realise that maximum impact requires attaching to coax cable so initially attached one each to both ends but later increased that to two each end. Then the usb power cable to Qutest. Then other power cables used in the system short of analog line and speaker cables as they can be sensitive to cable inductance change. Even made a few windings of Ethernet cable (feeding my source) around largest ferrite cores and post-tested with the player's network test that it is still capable of the peak bandwidth expected.
> 
> ...


That's an interesting post!

Have you tried ferrite on the power cord at first only?

Have you tried shielding the PSU?

Any close pics?


----------



## PANURUS (May 30, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> That's an interesting post!
> 
> Have you tried ferrite on the power cord at first only?
> 
> ...



If you want to learn about ferrites.
http://audiosystemsgroup.com/publish.htm

Now i use a shielded mains distribution block Supra  Lorad MD06-EU
with rfi reduced by 40db.
But i need to place ferrites on the input cable lorad 2.5 Silver CS-EU

I choose:
Fair-Rite High Freq 61Material  /  Ferrite Fair-Rite BB Freq 43&44 Mat  /  Ferrite      Fair-Rite Low & BB Freq 31 Mat  /  Ferrite

1000 ohm is a good value so with 5 of each i have enough.

The MD06-EU reduced acidity coming from RFI differentiel mode.
The ferrite on the cable open the space a lot: Common mode.

My Dave and my Hugo2 were polluted by my source Bryston BDP3. My Bryston was polluted with main and switch.
So i put ferrite on the RJ45 cable too.

I can explain more with PM.


----------



## Zzt231gr

PANURUS said:


> If you want to learn about ferrites.
> http://audiosystemsgroup.com/publish.htm
> 
> Now i use a shielded mains distribution block Supra  Lorad MD06-EU
> ...


Yes,please.I want to know more.Pm me so we don't hijack the thread.


----------



## SearchOfSub (May 30, 2018)

plsvn said:


> Customers are not expected to follow every forum and read every interview, post, comment, review whatever out there!
> 
> Warranty voiding by using third party PSUs has to be written on product manual or official web pages (they don't even *have to* read web pages: it has to be on the manual that comes with the product itself)
> This was the case for 2Qute but it is **NOT** for Qutest




That has been the case for all Chord DACS going back to Chord Qute days. Also, designer Rob Watts also recommends using it's own plug not a third party aftermarket psu on  this thread as well. I forget what post # it was but it should be in the past few pages. He recommends not getting ANY aftermarket PSU but rather getting USB banks instead.

These aftermarket PSU's have been around Chord for a long time. They always made new ones everytime Chord came out with a new product. And it looks like there is aftermarket PSU going around for Qutest as well now. Same ole' story.


----------



## plsvn (May 30, 2018)

SearchOfSub said:


> That has been the case for all Chord DACS going back to Chord Qute days. Also, designer Rob Watts also recommends using it's own plug not a third party aftermarket psu on  this thread as well. I forget what post # it was but it should be in the past few pages. He recommends not getting ANY aftermarket PSU but rather getting USB banks instead.
> 
> These aftermarket PSU's have been around Chord for a long time. They always made new ones everytime Chord came out with a new product. And it looks like there is aftermarket PSU going around for Qutest as well now. Same ole' story.



OMG!
Point was about voiding Qutest's warranty by using a third party PS, not about what people (or even RW) say about if using one is effective or not

Warranty voiding *has to be written on the papers that do come with the product* and for Qutest... it is *NOT*: full stop!!!


----------



## Triode User

plsvn said:


> OMG!
> Point was about voiding Qutest's warranty by using a third party PS, not about what people (or even RW) say about if using one is effective or not
> Warranty voiding *has to be written on the papers that do come with the product* and for Qutest... it is *NOT*: full stop!!!



Well actually I don’t think it does have to be written on the papers that come with the product. The whole issue is about whether if a Chord product requires repair and if it is found to be due to an aftermarket PSU then are Chord entitled to refuse to repair under warranty? The chance of an aftermarket psu doing damage might be small but it is possible if the psu itself mal functions or is out of spec for the voltage supplied etc. In this case it is not about what is written in a manual because I think Chord will be entitled not to honour a warranty if the damage is caused by another manufacturers product just in the same way as if you had dropped the dac. 

It’s that simple. No need to go looking for posts on here or what is written in the manual.


----------



## plsvn

from 2Qute's User Manual (the printed one that comes with the DAC):
"Please ONLY use the power adapter supplied. Using an non-genuine power adapter may void your warranty."

Nothing alike on Qutest's


----------



## Triode User

plsvn said:


> from 2Qute's User Manual (the printed one that comes with the DAC):
> "Please ONLY use the power adapter supplied. Using an non-genuine power adapter may void your warranty."
> 
> Nothing alike on Qutest's



Yes, but you see my point. Using an after market PSU is your own risk if it is out of spec and damages the DAC. No one would expect Chord to honour a warranty in those circumstances no matter what. The risk is slim but it is there.


----------



## plsvn (May 31, 2018)

yes: obviously if one sends back under warranty, for repair/replacement, a fried DAC... 

point is people keep saying, here, that warranty is voided by just using a third party PS even if it is in specs, whilst this is not, obviously, the case.
"*May void* your warranty" was written, in fact, on 2Qute's manual


----------



## Triode User

I think you and I are at the same point now.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Back on track!

Has anyone used a goog transport around $1-1.5k and had better results than his previous CD player-transport?Did you hear a difference?


----------



## jayz (May 31, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> That's an interesting post!
> 
> Have you tried ferrite on the power cord at first only?
> 
> ...




Yes I did try ferrite on the power chord first but will not claim I heard a difference right away. It is when I did the whole lot including all cables to my source, that I noticed the improvement. Initially, I was listening to the background / quiet passages hoping they will somehow sound quieter but it was later that I realised that transients and dynamics had improved in clarity and impact. Now I could take out ferrites one by one to see where they helped most but not much value to me in the findings.

Not tried shielding because in my experience, if done incorrectly, aftermarket / retrofit shielding can make things worse and act as antennae. To clean up mains, I use tacima cs929 mains conditioners which definitely does its job.

A couple of pics taken in haste, you can just about see the ferrites on cables feeding Qutest as well as my source Digital player.


----------



## Triode User

jayz said:


> Yes I did try ferrite on the power chord first but will not claim I heard a difference right away. It is when I did the whole lot including all cables to my source, that I noticed the improvement. Initially, I was listening to the background / quiet passages hoping they will somehow sound quieter but it was later that I realised that transients and dynamics had improved in clarity and impact. Now I could take out ferrites one by one to see where they helped most but not much value to me in the findings.
> 
> Not tried shielding because in my experience, if done incorrectly, aftermarket / retrofit shielding can make things worse and act as antennae. To clean up mains, I use tacima cs929 mains conditioners which definitely does its job.
> 
> A couple of pics taken in haste, you can just about see the ferrites on cables feeding Qutest as well as my source Digital player.



Thanks. We always like pictures.

Just a note of caution about bending BNC and other coaxial cables as tightly as that. They are not designed for small radius bends and will inevitably be squashing the dielectric around the centre conductor and this in turn places the centre conductor closer to the sheath. This will have an effect on the cable performance and is not recommended. An inside bend radius of 5 or preferably 10 times the cable diameter is normally recommended.


----------



## jayz (May 31, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Thanks. We always like pictures.
> 
> Just a note of caution about bending BNC and other coaxial cables as tightly as that. They are not designed for small radius bends and will inevitably be squashing the dielectric around the centre conductor and this in turn places the centre conductor closer to the sheath. This will have an effect on the cable performance and is not recommended. An inside bend radius of 5 or preferably 10 times the cable diameter is normally recommended.



That is a good point actually. I vaguely remember there was a min turn radius specified for this particular Belden 1694a cable and clearly I have over stretched the limits. Originally I had had it protruding further out resulting in a larger radius so might go back to that and forget about negative side cosmetic wise.

Edit: By the way I just read a post from Rob saying Ferrites are only recommended in differential signalling as in USB cables so not sure whether it was a good idea to loop my ethernet cable around ferrite. The one consolation I have is that I did run the network test on my digital player to confirm that it is still able to comfortably run the full bandwidth it expects and it did. As we are not worried about timing effects on Ethernet cables, I left it at that but if anyone has a different opinion/experience would be good to learn.


----------



## dawktah2

jayz said:


> That is a good point actually. I vaguely remember there was a min turn radius specified for this particular Belden 1694a cable and clearly I have over stretched the limits. Originally I had had it protruding further out resulting in a larger radius so might go back to that and forget about negative side cosmetic wise.



Would a right angle connector help or will that introduce a source of noise?


----------



## jayz

dawktah2 said:


> Would a right angle connector help or will that introduce a source of noise?



I tried a few cables and some seem to affect the sound for long runs ( somewhat in line with cable reviews out there ) so I made the decision I don't want a cable adding its own signature. There was a particular QED cable which I thought did not add anything and indeed the right angle matches that in performance but of course where is the reference in all these and the connector works for me as it also avoids long runs of analog cables to the rack so I have left it at that.


----------



## OG10

Is there anyway to turn this thing off?

Or do I have to d/c the USB power chord?


----------



## plsvn

just leave it on


----------



## dawktah2

Just downloaded Steely Dan "Gaucho" and will give a listen on Qutest tomorrow. Now if they'd only release "Aja."


----------



## kovacs

jayz said:


> On the subject of reducing interference using ferrite rings, I have been experimenting with Qutest and discovered... lo and behold there is indeed an improvement to be derived. Now before this explodes into an unnecessary argument I have to clarify that the effects of Ferrites on cables (particularly digital cables) is an accepted phenomenon on Headfi and Chord threads in general. Have to clarify that I do not see this as an issue with Qutest but rather a weakness with the EMI RFI polluted environments we live in these days. Therefore it is an ideal opportunity for improvement should one chose to explore and experiment. Phew, with that out of the way, here is what I have done...
> 
> I got myself two packs of Dreamtop Ferrite rings (various sizes) and went about attaching to cables. Reading the Dave thread, I came to realise that maximum impact requires attaching to coax cable so initially attached one each to both ends but later increased that to two each end. Then the usb power cable to Qutest. Then other power cables used in the system short of analog line and speaker cables as they can be sensitive to cable inductance change. Even made a few windings of Ethernet cable (feeding my source) around largest ferrite cores and post-tested with the player's network test that it is still capable of the peak bandwidth expected.
> 
> ...



Now this is a cheap, easy and safe tweak that anyone could try. I only have two of these laying around, so I looped the power cable for the Qutest through one and attached the other one to the digital cable and I think I can already hear a difference, the improvement is small but I think soundstage is even better with these in place (and it was already very impressive). Now it could be that my mind is playing tricks on me, but it definitely does not sound worse, but do try for yourself. I have tried these before on a pair of interconnects and that did make the sound worse, a couple of years ago I've also used these ferrite rings on my tuner because I had a lot of interference from mains pollution and it made a big and easily noticeable difference then. So like you said they seem to work best on power cables and digital data cables. I've already ordered a pack of 10 for 2€/$ from AliExpress, for one the ones I have are white and I want to replace them with black ones, also it won't hurt to try multiple on one cable, it's easily reversible if I don't like the results.


----------



## ZappaMan (Jun 2, 2018)

Deleted - wrong thread.


----------



## Triode User

kovacs said:


> Now this is a cheap, easy and safe tweak that anyone could try. I only have two of these laying around, so I looped the power cable for the Qutest through one and attached the other one to the digital cable and I think I can already hear a difference, the improvement is small but I think soundstage is even better with these in place (and it was already very impressive). Now it could be that my mind is playing tricks on me, but it definitely does not sound worse, but do try for yourself. I have tried these before on a pair of interconnects and that did make the sound worse, a couple of years ago I've also used these ferrite rings on my tuner because I had a lot of interference from mains pollution and it made a big and easily noticeable difference then. So like you said they seem to work best on power cables and digital data cables. I've already ordered a pack of 10 for 2€/$ from AliExpress, for one the ones I have are white and I want to replace them with black ones, also it won't hurt to try multiple on one cable, it's easily reversible if I don't like the results.



Interesting to hear of your experiments but of course best to apply them to one sort of cable at a time to see which is having the most effect. Also, don’t forget that all ferrites are not the same and they target different frequencies although some are more broadband than others. 

You are right about your conclusions about using them on analogue cables and by and large this is not a good idea.


----------



## Zzt231gr

kovacs said:


> Now this is a cheap, easy and safe tweak that anyone could try. I only have two of these laying around, so I looped the power cable for the Qutest through one and attached the other one to the digital cable and I think I can already hear a difference, the improvement is small but I think soundstage is even better with these in place (and it was already very impressive). Now it could be that my mind is playing tricks on me, but it definitely does not sound worse, but do try for yourself. I have tried these before on a pair of interconnects and that did make the sound worse, a couple of years ago I've also used these ferrite rings on my tuner because I had a lot of interference from mains pollution and it made a big and easily noticeable difference then. So like you said they seem to work best on power cables and digital data cables. I've already ordered a pack of 10 for 2€/$ from AliExpress, for one the ones I have are white and I want to replace them with black ones, also it won't hurt to try multiple on one cable, it's easily reversible if I don't like the results.


Pics please!!

Have you noticed for decreased dynamics due to the artificial coil that you created to the cord?


----------



## KevinjKim (Jun 2, 2018)

[ sorry ] I know that this is a Qutest thread —- Chord seems to release new DACS every 3 years~ the DAVE, TT, Hugo 1, 2Qute all were released in 2014-2015-2017.  Everyone of them have been upgraded to the Xilinx Artrix 7 chips and double the tap-length on the devices.  Would it be possible that a new DAVE will launch later this year?
Does a new chip; example [ from Spartan 6 to the Xilinx Artrix 7 ] and double the tap-length make big differences in the sound quality?


----------



## Skampmeister

Last I heard, Rob Watts was not working on a new Dave.


----------



## rhern213

I had a few questions as I'm thinking of cleaning up my source components and lines, see if anyone can help me understand what areas are really worth while or what's voodoo.

My current setup is going to be as follows: External HDD -> USB Hub -> Win10 Laptop/JRiver -> USB Hub -> Qutest -> V280 -> HEKv2

The External HDD and Qutest are both connected to the same USB Hub which is connected to the Laptop. The laptop only has 2 USB-C ports which is why I'm using a Hub.

My initial thoughts were to replace the PC with an Auralic Aries, thus eliminating the USB Hub and improving the ports.

My questions are the following.
1. Will I benefit from using a dedicated source such as an Auralic Aries? I'm assuming the output ports and PSU implementation would be better than on my laptop?
2. Would I benefit from swapping out the HDD for an SSD? Considering the HDD is isolated from the PC through a USB hub, would this still introduce some noise from the disc spinning by the time it gets through to the DAC?
3. Would the use of the USB hub and having both the external HDD and Qutest connected to the same HUB cause any more noise/interference? Would I benefit from separating the USB ports where these are feeding into?

One other thing to add is I have an iFi iLlink USB to Spdif converter on the way to test. But I wanted to clean up everything else so there's nothing in the way of skewing the test.

Thanks for any feedback!


----------



## miketlse

rhern213 said:


> I had a few questions as I'm thinking of cleaning up my source components and lines, see if anyone can help me understand what areas are really worth while or what's voodoo.
> 
> My current setup is going to be as follows: External HDD -> USB Hub -> Win10 Laptop/JRiver -> USB Hub -> Qutest -> V280 -> HEKv2
> 
> ...


Maybe step back and pause for a minute.
I don't have a Qutest, but i do have a Mojo and Hugo 2.
I find a Shanling M1 to be a good music transport, then a USB cable to the DAC.
The M1 or potentially the new M0, remove all issues with RFI and ground loops, and are cheap enough to experiment with.


----------



## rhern213 (Jun 4, 2018)

miketlse said:


> Maybe step back and pause for a minute.
> I don't have a Qutest, but i do have a Mojo and Hugo 2.
> I find a Shanling M1 to be a good music transport, then a USB cable to the DAC.
> The M1 or potentially the new M0, remove all issues with RFI and ground loops, and are cheap enough to experiment with.



Seems like the M1 is a DAP correct? In this way wouldn't any DAP that has a USB out work the same?

I have a V30 with UAPP that will output bitperfect through USB directly into the DAC. One issue with this connection is it seems the USB out doesn't quite have enough voltage for a strong steady connection so I've gotten occasional drops and bad static. If I connect the V30 to a powered USB Hub then all seems good.

But I still thought the USB port on a PC or dedicated digital transport should be better.


----------



## jayz (Jun 5, 2018)

rhern213 said:


> I had a few questions as I'm thinking of cleaning up my source components and lines, see if anyone can help me understand what areas are really worth while or what's voodoo.
> 
> My current setup is going to be as follows: External HDD -> USB Hub -> Win10 Laptop/JRiver -> USB Hub -> Qutest -> V280 -> HEKv2
> 
> ...



The issue with general purpose laptops is that even if we dedicate it for the sole purpose of playing music, there are different things going on in the OS at different times - other program activity, software update, etc etc so the disks get hammered randomly - how can we optimise something that is random in behaviour. And can you imagine the number of switching power devices in there creating noise - it is not just about mains power noise entering via external power adapter.

I think a dedicated source is more likely to be designed with the goal of minimising noise - both generated and external not to mention when you set it up with a controller app on a phone etc, it is a nice interface to operate. Some will argue that there are ways to setup a similar control interface on a laptop but that is besides the point.

My slimdevices transporter streamer/player is approaching a decade in use but the best it can do is 24/96 so aries v1 femto has been on my radar as a possible upgrade. However, might hold off till we hear about Chord's plans especially around future MScalers and digital players etc. Aries mini + internal ssd is an another potential interim solution but I am looking for another genuine upgrade in performance so might wait and see how it plays out with Chord.


----------



## rhern213

jayz said:


> The issue with general purpose laptops is that even if we dedicate it for the sole purpose of playing music, there are different things going on in the OS at different times - other program activity, software update, etc etc so the disks get hammered randomly - how can we optimise something that is random in behaviour. And can you imagine the number of switching power devices in there creating noise - it is not just about mains power noise entering via external power adapter.
> 
> I think a dedicated source is more likely to be designed with the goal of minimising noise - both generated and external not to mention when you set it up with a controller app on a phone etc, it is a nice interface to operate. Some will argue that there are ways to setup a similar control interface on a laptop but that is besides the point.
> 
> My slimdevices transporter streamer/player is approaching a decade in use but the best it can do is 24/96 so aries v1 femto has been on my radar as a possible upgrade. However, might hold off till we hear about Chord's plans especially around future MScalers and digital players etc. Aries mini + internal ssd is an another potential interim solution but I am looking for another genuine upgrade in performance so might wait and see how it plays out with Chord.



That's what my thoughts are, my purpose is to get some feedback on how much of a difference cleaning up the source would really make.

But I think I may have to just do this by trial and error since there are so  many variables and differences from what I read out there.

In any case a dedicated streamer/transport will make it a much simpler and nicer setup then having laptops and hubs, and drives hanging all over the place.


----------



## dawktah2

rhern213 said:


> That's what my thoughts are, my purpose is to get some feedback on how much of a difference cleaning up the source would really make.
> 
> But I think I may have to just do this by trial and error since there are so  many variables and differences from what I read out there.
> 
> In any case a dedicated streamer/transport will make it a much simpler and nicer setup then having laptops and hubs, and drives hanging all over the place.



I'm using a Synology server DS416play. The app allows direct USB playback to Qutest. Control using DS Audio app. Anyone else using Synology?


----------



## bmfmarius

> rhern213


Get the sotm 200 streamer + Audiobyte Hydra-Z USB bridge or sotm 200 ultra! And a good linear power supply for both!
I'm using one power supply for both units, the Hydra-Z USB bridge is feeding from the streamer's USB port!


----------



## musicman59

I bought a Keces DC LPS with dual adjustable output so one is set for 5v for the Qutest and the other at 9v for the Squeezebox Duet. I don't have the Duet connected yet because it DC connector is not very common so I am trying to get one to make the umbilical cord.
One thing that I noticed (have not spend a lot of time with it yet) is the sound now with the Qutest connected to the LPS is a little brighter. I wonder if it not really brightness but lower noise floor. I also notice a wider soundstage and better detail definition.


----------



## AlexB73

I'm EE engineer. And I know, to get 3 volt RMS output (that is 8.5 Volt peak to peak) you need at least 9-10 volt power supply voltage! And we know Qutest has just 5 volt input power supply. 
The question haw can you get 10 volts PS from 5 volts PS?
The answer is, you need DC to DC switched power supply!!!
Also internal FPGA generates noise. This noise has higher frequency spectrum (compare to switched power supply) and this kind of noise is more difficult to clean.

So why do you need external Linear Power Supply if Qutest has internal switched power supply and FPGA?


----------



## emrelights1973

Anyone using sp1000 as a transport for Qutest?


----------



## rhern213

bmfmarius said:


> Get the sotm 200 streamer + Audiobyte Hydra-Z USB bridge or sotm 200 ultra! And a good linear power supply for both!
> I'm using one power supply for both units, the Hydra-Z USB bridge is feeding from the streamer's USB port!



Thanks I'll check that out


----------



## dawktah2 (Jun 7, 2018)

I'm surprised I'm the only one using Synology Server and Audio Station and DS Audio.  Transport is controlled from PC anywhere on network (or internet) or mobile device and any other DLNA.  I cannot hear any noise introduction into the sound path, *dead silent*.  No PSU needed.  I'm using Synology Hybrid RAID with 4 disc so 2 disc redundancy for file integrity. Similar to RAID 6

https://www.synology.com/en-us/dsm/feature/audio_station

https://www.synology.com/en-global/knowledgebase/Mobile/help/DSaudio


----------



## Triode User (Jun 7, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> I'm surprised I'm the only one using Synology Server and Audio Station and DS Audio.  Transport is controlled from PC anywhere on network (or internet) or mobile device and any other DLNA.  I cannot hear any noise introduction into the sound path, *dead silent*.  No PSU needed.  I'm using Synology Hybrid RAID with 4 disc so 2 disc redundancy for file integrity. Similar to RAID 6
> https://www.synology.com/en-us/dsm/feature/audio_station
> https://www.synology.com/en-global/knowledgebase/Mobile/help/DSaudio



You raise an interesting point regarding possible noise being introduced into the digital domain and signal path. When we talk about noise issues in the digital path we are not usually talking about background noise or audible noise. Rather we are talking about RF or EMI generated noise which is inaudible in itself but which gets into the analogue and conversion stages and manifests itself by altering the character of the output sound. Hence I am not surprised that you report that your devices are *dead silent. *In reality this means nothing as to whether you have or do not have noise in your system.

This has been debated at length in the Blu2 thread where there is a consensus that the RF / EMI noise can be noticed because it can make the music appear to have a more detailed presentation or perhaps to appear to have a bigger sound stage and where the notes appear to have more attack etc etc. All of these things are false in the sense that they are not real enhancements to the sound but merely seem as if they are improvements from an initial impression or short listening session. With extended listening this false detail is often fatiguing and does not promote a desire for extended listening.

I was prompted to think again about this subject again because last night I was doing the final listening tests of my dedicated Blu2/Dave BNC cables. These cables are designed to strip out the unwanted RF/EMI noise and just leave the bare digital signal. To be honest the final version of the cable initially left me feeling a little underwhelmed. The immediate impression was that the life seemed to have been sucked out of the music and a certain dullness came come in it's place. Swopping back to a standard cable restored what I had thought of as detail, life and space in the music but then I realised that there was no real bass, no real detail, no real space. It was all an illusion and was in reality all just a bit harsh. Putting the treated cable back in the system made me realise that actually had more real detail, more shape to the notes and definitely less harshness. The music was also less 'in my face' and was inviting me to turn up the volume, something I had not been at all inclined to do with the standard cable because of the harshness.

I was listening to the new Marcus Miller CD, Laid Black. Half way through the first track I turned up the volume for the second time with the treated cables. The next thing I knew, I had listed to the whole CD in a glorious foot tapping session.

In the interests of the experiment I put the standard cables back in and started the CD from the first track again. The sense of detail was back (or so I thought) but so was a harshness that made me fairly quickly turn the volume down. Then I realised that I was missing the wonderful detail and texture of Marcus Millers bass notes. In fact much of the bass was being hidden by that upper mid harshness.  I did not last though the whole of the first track before I stopped the CD.

So, the point I am making is two fold. One, RF/EMI noise is not noise that can usually be heard as the equivalent of background noise. Two, following on from all this be wary of adding kit into the digital chain which seems to improve the sound. Ask yourself whether a change of kit has really improved the sound or has it just made it seem better. Different is not always better. A system with no RF noise will probably sound quieter, it will probably make you feel like turning up the volume and it will probably initially sound less detailed or less harsh. Ask yourself whether that reclocker or USB regenerator or power supply that has been added into the system is actually improving the sound or is it just making it sound different by adding noise into the system. I frequently mention that a mains regenerator that I used to own actually introduced more RF into the supply than came out of the wall socket.

@dawktah2 this is not at all aimed at you. It was just your post which mentioned noise and which prompted me to regale my recent experience.

And just to say again, try the Marcus Miller CD, Laid Black. If you like Marcus Miller you will like this and if you have not found Marcus Miller before then you are in for a treat (and remember to turn up the volume).


----------



## dawktah2

Triode User said:


> You raise an interesting point regarding possible noise being introduced into the digital domain and signal path. When we talk about noise issues in the digital path we are not usually talking about background noise or audible noise. Rather we are talking about RF or EMI generated noise which is inaudible in itself but which gets into the analogue and conversion stages and manifests itself by altering the character of the output sound. Hence I am not surprised that you report that your devices are *dead silent. *In reality this means nothing as to whether you have or do not have noise in your system.
> 
> This has been debated at length in the Blu2 thread where there is a consensus that the RF / EMI noise can be noticed because it can make the music appear to have a more detailed presentation or perhaps to appear to have a bigger sound stage and where the notes appear to have more attack etc etc. All of these things are false in the sense that they are not real enhancements to the sound but merely seem as if they are improvements from an initial impression or short listening session. With extended listening this false detail is often fatiguing and does not promote a desire for extended listening.
> 
> ...





None taken, in that vein I have the Chord Cable C-USB line cable. Not sure if brands are related. With Galvanic isolation in Qutest, other than "sound" is there a device to test for RF/EMI?


----------



## dbq5anlxj

will the qutest work with a non-powred usb cable?


----------



## dawktah2 (Jun 8, 2018)

Does anyone know off the top of their head which improves quality of audio file the by increment, sample rate or bit rate?  Going from 44.1/16 which is more improvement 44.1/24 or 88/16 (if it existed.)


----------



## plsvn (Jun 8, 2018)

Hi-Res bitdepth is always 24 so, eg, 44.1/24 **is** Hi-Res (and you can already hear it) 
then increasing sample rates (88.2, 96, 174.8, 192 etc) add even more information


----------



## dawktah2

plsvn said:


> Hi-Res bitdepth is always 24 so, eg, 44.1/24 **is** Hi-Res (and you can already hear it)
> then increasing sample rates (88.2, 96, 174.8, 192 etc) add even more information



Thanks for quick reply.  I bought some music that was 44.1/24 just wondering if I should have gotten 96/24


----------



## plsvn (Jun 8, 2018)

what you always have to (possibly) check when buying Hi-Res is... what samplerate/bitrate was the original recording (... if digital) taken at
the closer to that you go the higher quality you (are supposed to) get

then... actually there's more to it than just bits/KHz: some 44.1/16 recordings do sound much better than many Hi-Res ones so... just buy the music you love regardless of bits


----------



## AlexB73

plsvn said:


> what you always have to (possibly) check when buying Hi-Res is... what samplerate/bitrate was the original recording (... if digital) taken at
> the closer to that you go the higher quality you (are supposed to) get
> 
> then... actually there's more to it than just bits/KHz: some 44.1/16 recordings do sound much better than many Hi-Res ones so... just buy the music you love regardless of bits


It is true. 
Also a big part of new digital remasterings sound worst than original CD recording.
It is one of reasons why I prefer CD transport to computer audio.
Other reasons:
1. Much better music selection on CDs. You know what you are buying. So many scam and fake in Hi-Res audio...
2. You need to spend a lot of time, money and experience to computer audio to overperform CD transport sound quality (even of average transport).


----------



## OG10

I am using a 12" Macbook for hi-res files and have a dedicated CD player with optical out to the Qutest. 

I must say now after a week of thoroughly running it.. its a major improvement on the Chord Mojo


----------



## bmfmarius

> 2. You need to spend a lot of time, money and experience to computer audio to overperform CD transport sound quality (even of average transport).


So sad, so true!


----------



## Christer (Jun 9, 2018)

OG10 said:


> I am using a 12" Macbook for hi-res files and have a dedicated CD player with optical out to the Qutest.
> 
> I must say now after a week of thoroughly running it.. its a major improvement on the Chord Mojo


Ecxcuse my ignorance but I need to ask this question . If I connect my Cd player via optical out from the player into optical on my Qutest will that result in Qutest actually  playing the disc from the player even if it as in my case has its own inbuilt  dac?
One of my old Cd players a Zindak SCD 2 SACD player has optical out.
Or will it only work from a transport only cd drive ?
Cheers Christer


----------



## bmfmarius

The CD player will act as the transport and Qutest as dac


----------



## dawktah2

Mmm, I wonder did I keep my Nakamichi from the 90's


----------



## miketlse

Christer said:


> Ecxcuse my ignorance but I need to ask this question . If I connect my Cd player via optical out from the player into optical on my Qutest will that resusult in Qutest actually  playing the disc from the player even if it as in my case has its own inbuilt  dac?
> One of my old Cd players a Zindak SCD 2 SACD player has optical out.
> Or will it only work from a transport only cd drive ?
> Cheers Christer


It should work ok as a transport. If you have the user manual, does it indicate if the optical output is 192khz or limited to say 96khz?


----------



## AlexB73 (Jun 8, 2018)

I tried to connect my old CD Cary 303 to 2Qute by optical cable QED Reference versus coaxial vintage Belkin Pro (blue).
Coaxial cable sounded much more natural. Optical cable sounded cold and glassy in comparison.

In contrast, Mojo sounded more detailed with QED Reference optical cable.
Maybe it was, because lusher and more muddy Mojo sound.
But 2Qute didn't benefit from optical cable, it sounds transparent and detailed enough with coaxial.


----------



## bmfmarius

> Coaxial cable sounded much more natural. Optical cable sounded cold and glassy in comparison.


Yes coax is better! But a good cable is mandatory, and matching impedance


----------



## OG10

Yep, using my Marantz CD6006 UKE as the transport.


----------



## Rob Watts

dawktah2 said:


> Thanks for quick reply.  I bought some music that was 44.1/24 just wondering if I should have gotten 96/24



You have two issues here - the sample rate conversion from 96k to 44.1, and that fact it is a lower sample rate. I am not bothered too much by the lower sample rate, so long as it is binary multiples, but I am bothered by sample rate conversion, which adds lots of distortion and noise and degrades transient timing. So my rule of thumb is if it is a 96k original, buy that rather than the 44.1 version.


----------



## dac64

AlexB73 said:


> I tried to connect my old CD Cary 303 to 2Qute by optical cable QED Reference versus coaxial vintage Belkin Pro (blue).
> Coaxial cable sounded much more natural. Optical cable sounded cold and glassy in comparison.



Qutest is different story, l believe!


----------



## dawktah2

Rob Watts said:


> You have two issues here - the sample rate conversion from 96k to 44.1, and that fact it is a lower sample rate. I am not bothered too much by the lower sample rate, so long as it is binary multiples, but I am bothered by sample rate conversion, which adds lots of distortion and noise and degrades transient timing. So my rule of thumb is if it is a 96k original, buy that rather than the 44.1 version.



Thanks so much, is there a source of "original" sample rates for source materials? I don't think HDtracks or Acoustic Sounds tells you.

--Chris


----------



## rhern213 (Jun 9, 2018)

Looks like I posted the same question as dawktah2 above.


----------



## Rob Watts

I think for rock/pop it is very difficult to download original recordings - much of the time I can only get MP3 as downloads, which I refuse to buy.

99% of my purchases are classical, and I get them from Chandos website, and Presto classical. Both generally offer options to buy the original master recording, normally 96k. I will always buy the 96 in preference to the 44.1, mainly because of the sample rate conversion issue.


----------



## azabu

@Rob Watts 

Rob, would you have any estimated release dates for the m scaler for either H2 or Qutest?

Could we expect something later this year or in 2019?


----------



## Rob Watts

Sorry, but I can't discuss future Chord product release dates... You will have to wait for the official Chord Electronics product launch.


----------



## panditji

Hi, does the Qutest Window's driver support Windows 7?


----------



## miketlse

panditji said:


> Hi, does the Qutest Window's driver support Windows 7?


The chord site offers several win drivers to download.
Win 7 and win 10 share many commonalities, so I suggest the win 10 driver should be ok for you.
However as always with IT questions, keep a backup of your drivers, just in case.


----------



## bluenight

This sounds exactly the same as hugo 2 when that one is used as a dac? 

Was impressed with hugo 2 dac section.


----------



## andromeda1954

bluenight said:


> This sounds exactly the same as hugo 2 when that one is used as a dac?
> 
> Was impressed with hugo 2 dac section.


No the Qutest sounds better as a dac . I compared both for a week used as a dac and decided to 
keep  the Qutest .So if you don't need a amp go for the Qutest .


----------



## rhern213

bluenight said:


> This sounds exactly the same as hugo 2 when that one is used as a dac?
> 
> Was impressed with hugo 2 dac section.



The Qutest should be a bit better as a DAC alone because 1. No potential interference from the amp section. 2. USB port isolation


----------



## jarnopp

rhern213 said:


> The Qutest should be a bit better as a DAC alone because 1. No potential interference from the amp section. 2. USB port isolation


I agree without the galvanic isolation, if you are using USB. But Qutest does also have an “amp section” (Mojo’s amp section, in fact); with 3 preset outputs: 1, 2 and 3 volts. 

I’m not disagreeing that it sounds better to you. I haven’t heard it, but there could be factors in its simpler design that help.


----------



## rhern213 (Jun 14, 2018)

jarnopp said:


> I agree without the galvanic isolation, if you are using USB. But Qutest does also have an “amp section” (Mojo’s amp section, in fact); with 3 preset outputs: 1, 2 and 3 volts.
> 
> I’m not disagreeing that it sounds better to you. I haven’t heard it, but there could be factors in its simpler design that help.



Yes that's correct, I forget it still does technically have an amp section. I do use USB that's why there's a difference for me.


----------



## bluenight

rhern213 said:


> The Qutest should be a bit better as a DAC alone because 1. No potential interference from the amp section. 2. USB port isolation


How about qutest must have wall power to work vs hugo 2 is battery powered. Havent hugo 2 the advantage there? 

I saw they sell a linear power supply to qutest https://mcru.co.uk/product/mcru-linear-power-supply-chord-qutest-dac/?v=f003c44deab6

Description said 
"Using the two stages of regulator, we achieve a noise floor equal or better than most battery supplies,"

I would be using the optical input.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Lol!

How is it even possible to have lower noise than a battery,which is noiseless by nature???


----------



## Triode User

Zzt231gr said:


> Lol!
> 
> How is it even possible to have lower noise than a battery,which is noiseless by nature???



Batteries are low noise but are not noiseless. Different types of battery exhibit very different noise levels.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Batteries are pure DC.Where does the noise come from?RFI from cable?


----------



## Triode User

No, they are not pure dc without noise. They have voltage noise that comes from the chemical process in the battery used to generate the voltage.


----------



## Rob Watts

But this noise is negligible.

I used a Hugo 2 battery, loaded with a 15 ohm resistor to draw 0.25A. A wt 20 to 20k it was 670nV on the AP with the battery connected, with the battery not connected to the 15 ohm load it was ... 670nV. So no noise at all from the battery.

Using the AP's 2.5MHz ADC with a 1 MHz bandwidth, it went from 8.45 uV to 9 to 10 uV. Against any active regulator this is fantastic performance.... A quality linear regulator would be 60uV in the audio bandwidth alone. And ultra low noise regulators are an enormous 12uV 20-20kHz alone, let alone a 1 MHz bandwidth.


----------



## rhern213 (Jun 15, 2018)

bluenight said:


> How about qutest must have wall power to work vs hugo 2 is battery powered. Havent hugo 2 the advantage there?
> 
> I saw they sell a linear power supply to qutest https://mcru.co.uk/product/mcru-linear-power-supply-chord-qutest-dac/?v=f003c44deab6
> 
> ...



Yes but you don't have to use wall power for the Qutest, you can use an external battery pack as well.


----------



## rhern213 (Jun 15, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> But this noise is negligible.
> 
> I used a Hugo 2 battery, loaded with a 15 ohm resistor to draw 0.25A. A wt 20 to 20k it was 670nV on the AP with the battery connected, with the battery not connected to the 15 ohm load it was ... 670nV. So no noise at all from the battery.
> 
> Using the AP's 2.5MHz ADC with a 1 MHz bandwidth, it went from 8.45 uV to 9 to 10 uV. Against any active regulator this is fantastic performance.... A quality linear regulator would be 60uV in the audio bandwidth alone. And ultra low noise regulators are an enormous 12uV 20-20kHz alone, let alone a 1 MHz bandwidth.



Hi Rob, I think you've mentioned this before, but over all else you do recommend a battery pack as a power supply for the Qutest for the best possible SQ?

If so are there any particular brands you personally use or recommend to try out?

If not is there any other typical LPS/UPS type you recommend?

There are so many options, discussions, contradicting info I've gone through that it's exhausting and hard to discern facts vs nonsense.

I trust the person who actually designed the darn thing over anyone else.

And thanks for designing a really excellent product!


----------



## azabu

rhern213 said:


> Yes but you don't have to use wall power for the Qutest, you can use an external battery pack as well.



I tried this and (to me) it sounded flat. I've gone the LPS 1.2 route and pleased with the results.


----------



## Triode User

Rob Watts said:


> *But this noise is negligible*.
> 
> I used a Hugo 2 battery, loaded with a 15 ohm resistor to draw 0.25A. A wt 20 to 20k it was 670nV on the AP with the battery connected, with the battery not connected to the 15 ohm load it was ... 670nV. So no noise at all from the battery.
> 
> Using the AP's 2.5MHz ADC with a 1 MHz bandwidth, it went from 8.45 uV to 9 to 10 uV. Against any active regulator this is fantastic performance.... A quality linear regulator would be 60uV in the audio bandwidth alone. And ultra low noise regulators are an enormous 12uV 20-20kHz alone, let alone a 1 MHz bandwidth.



You spoiled my pedantic fun.


----------



## Rob Watts

rhern213 said:


> Hi Rob, I think you've mentioned this before, but over all else you do recommend a battery pack as a power supply for the Qutest for the best possible SQ?
> 
> If so are there any particular brands you personally use or recommend to try out?
> 
> ...



The one I use is Poweradd Pilot Pro2. Now this has internal regulators - so it is noisy on the OP - but the key is the absence of mains bourne RF noise. With Hugo 2, adding the unit makes no difference to the SQ, and it's the issue of RF noise that is key, not the noise on the OP. Also, it's completely isolated from the mains, so no ground loops or leakage current is possible.


----------



## AlexB73 (Jun 15, 2018)

Guys,
How much break in time does Qutest need?
I got my Qutest in the previous week.
I tried to listen it twice.

After 4x24 hours Qutest sounded really bad and unmusical.

After 7x24 hours Qutest sounded better, at least comparable to 2Qute.
But steel, sound wasn't open like in my 2Qute and in term of details and separation it was just a very little better then 2Qute.
I use white setting of the filter.


----------



## ecwl

AlexB73 said:


> Guys,
> How much break in time does Qutest need?
> I got my Qutest in the previous week.
> I tried to listen it twice.
> ...


That’s unusual. Maybe you should set your Qutest to output at 2V or even 1V. Perhaps you were always clipping your preamplifier at 3V with 2Qute and now Qutest which is why it’s hard to hear the sonic improvements.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Agree.I don't think mine burned in.Played fine from the beginning.


----------



## kovacs (Jun 15, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> Guys,
> How much break in time does Qutest need?
> I got my Qutest in the previous week.
> I tried to listen it twice.
> ...



Seven days should be plenty, I did notice a difference after 24 hours of continuous burn-in with white noise, but after that sound quality didn't really change much anymore. I liked the sound right out of the box. I do find that the Qutest is a very sensitive piece of equipment, small changes can have a big impact on sound, definitely try to keep it away from power sources like transformers and power cables. What source are you using ?


----------



## AlexB73

I don't have an issue with 3V input.
My integrated amp. has L-pad on input before the first tube.
Actually my cartridge-SUT-phonostage (EMT TSD15 - Sun Audio/Tamura SAT1000 -  EAR834P) combination gives about 9 volts RMS input to my integrated 300B SET! 
No problem at all!

I do burn-in with music on repeat. It takes longer time compared to pink noise.

I use 2Qute and Qutest in the same conditions. Both use power supply supplied by Chord.
I use Cary 303 CD player as transport with Belkin Pro "blue" coaxial cable.
This transport overperformed my Mac Book Pro (with Audioquest Carbon USB cable) by miles.


----------



## Sage Encore

Hi Guys,
Sorry if I am asking in the wrong thread, can any kind souls please help. My current setup is: Amp: Simaudio HAD 430 (DAC model), Source is SP 1000, I also have a ALO CDM. Should I invest in a Qutest since I basically have three different DACs ie, My amp has a ESS Sabre 32bit 9018, my source SP1000 has dual AKM chips think its AK 4497EQ which I can use as a DAC and my ALO CDM has Wolfson DAC on board which I can also use as a DAC using Line out.

Will I see a significant increase in sound reproduction to all of the above combos I have in hand or should I just invest in something else. Thank you for your times guys.


----------



## NeoVibe

Hi all,

I currently have a Hugo (mk1) connected to an Auralic Aries (the full fat one). In this configuration I can only get the DSD lights in the Hugo when I activate DoP (DSD over PCM) in the Aries but this is, if I understand correctly because the Hugo only supports DSD in DoP 'encapsulation'.

I am considering the upgrade to a Qutest specifically for native DSD support but according to the online manual, "Native DSD playback is only available via Windows OS with the driver available from the Chord Electronics website." and I am trying to understand what this means:
 - If I am running Roon on a MAC can I get native DSD?
 - the sentence assumes the Qutest is either connected to PC or a MAC but in this case it will be connected to neither, but instead a specific devices, the Auralic Aries - will I get native DSD?

Thank you for the replies. Sorry if this has been discussed before but it is impossible to read 100 pages backwards 

Regards all.


----------



## x RELIC x (Jun 18, 2018)

NeoVibe said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I currently have a Hugo (mk1) connected to an Auralic Aries (the full fat one). In this configuration I can only get the DSD lights in the Hugo when I activate DoP (DSD over PCM) in the Aries but this is, if I understand correctly because the Hugo only supports DSD in DoP 'encapsulation'.
> 
> ...



DoP will be bit for bit the same DSD file as “Native DSD”.

DoP was simply developed as a way to use DSD over USB without audio drivers, and the PCM wrapper does not affect the DSD data. Unless you are experiencing drop-outs from the extra computation needed for DoP then you can rest assured you are hearing the full DSD. "Native DSD" really is an unfortunate name for DSD with audio drivers.

Reading your post I presume you know this already so what is wrong with DoP from the Aries?


----------



## NeoVibe

Hi there,

No I wasn't really aware of what DSD over PCM was. The Auralic is a new adition to the system, so nothing wrong with the sound, I simply assumed native was the real deal while DoP would mean some sonic compromise. 

If that is the case I am fine. 

Regarding my questions, I assume that both via Aries and Mac computer DoP is the only technical possibility (because no drivers are involved). 

Thanks for the answer.


----------



## x RELIC x

NeoVibe said:


> Hi there,
> 
> No I wasn't really aware of what DSD over PCM was. The Auralic is a new adition to the system, so nothing wrong with the sound, I simply assumed native was the real deal while DoP would mean some sonic compromise.
> 
> ...



Mac OSX actually has many USB audio drivers built-in but may also require drivers for some devices provided by the manufacturer. Windows based computers haven’t for a looooong time, hence the acceptance that drivers are required. Also, Windows software can also use DoP. Incidentally, other standards like coaxial and optical can also utilize DoP. 

There is an advantage to some USB audio drivers in that if packets are skipped or if there are errors it can re-send them, but if there are no playback issues (computational overhead) then there is no concern with DoP.

The issue started because the USB standard only recognized PCM as an audio stream so then DSD over PCM (encapsulating the data in a PCM wrapper) was created. When the receiving device recognizes the DoP flag it dumps the PCM marker and plays as 100% DSD.


----------



## NeoVibe

x RELIC x said:


> Mac OSX actually has many USB audio drivers built-in but may also require drivers for some devices provided by the manufacturer. Windows based computers haven’t for a looooong time, hence the acceptance that drivers are required. Also, Windows software can also use DoP. Incidentally, other standards like coaxial and optical can also utilize DoP.
> 
> There is an advantage to some USB audio drivers in that if packets are skipped or if there are errors it can re-send them, but if there are no playback issues (computational overhead) then there is no concern with DoP.
> 
> The issue started because the USB standard only recognized PCM as an audio stream so then DSD over PCM (encapsulating the data in a PCM wrapper) was created. When the receiving device recognizes the DoP flag it dumps the PCM marker and plays as 100% DSD.



Thanks again for the additional information. 

The point regarding the non existence of a "re-send" mechanism in (most?) USB dac implementations is one of the reasons why I think a good dedicate streamer with a good clock/isolation/low-noise etc is so important (without the re-send possibility the PCM/DSD streams need to be as accurate as possible as errors cannot be recovered with absolute certainty, although i believe there are mechanisms in place to "guesstimate" what the original stream really was. 

You mentioned some drivers had this resend mechanism. Is this the case of the Hugo/Qutest products family? (I would assume not and don't know of any dac with this capability)

Regards


----------



## x RELIC x

NeoVibe said:


> You mentioned some drivers had this resend mechanism. Is this the case of the Hugo/Qutest products family? (I would assume not and don't know of any dac with this capability)



I’m not sure how universal this behaviour is for other drivers, but my information regarding resending packets with the Chord driver comes from this post (and a few others):



Rob Watts said:


> It's true that standard driverless USB does not resend faulty packets; but with the Chord Windows driver, it does. It's also true that standard USB has extremely low USB errors too, and if you got faulty data, it would sound as clicks and ticks. I have never heard a tick via USB from my mobile phone ever, and that is driverless.
> As too optical errors - it either happens all the time (struggling with 192) or never, so SPDIF is actually robust in practice. I do all my measurements (some taking hours) with optical, and one bit failure I would see it in the measurements, and I never have.


----------



## Triode User

x RELIC x said:


> I’m not sure how universal this behaviour is for other drivers, but my information regarding resending packets with the Chord driver comes from this post (and a few others):



But don’t get too hung up on this resend business. Note that Rob Watts said, “It's also true that standard USB has extremely low USB errors too, and if you got faulty data, it would sound as clicks and ticks. I have never heard a tick via USB from my mobile phone ever, and that is driverless.”


----------



## x RELIC x

Triode User said:


> But don’t get too hung up on this resend business. Note that Rob Watts said, “It's also true that standard USB has extremely low USB errors too, and if you got faulty data, it would sound as clicks and ticks. I have never heard a tick via USB from my mobile phone ever, and that is driverless.”



Exactly. I’ve never had an error either, but the question was asked.


----------



## Sage Encore

emrelights1973 said:


> Anyone using sp1000 as a transport for Qutest?


I am also waiting for an answer


----------



## KevinjKim (Jun 21, 2018)

Hey~ I used the QUTEST for about 10 days ~ I still have the SP1000.  I just upgraded it to the DAVE ~ it actually sounds good with an optical cable.  I had a OTG for the usb but the sound quality was poor~ try using the usb-b to usb-c type ~ that might be better ~
With the optical I really like the sound quality better that the usb-b to usb-c type using OTG.  I also agree that it sound a bit warmer compare to the Hugo 2 .  Many people are saying that it sounds better for various reasons, but I have to agree~


----------



## azabu

I love the Qutest and here's a good youtube video showing it's capability.

The battery power supply is most intriguing.


----------



## dawktah2

I'm actually going to try a battery pack.  I get a buzz/ring when *either* of my HVAC units kick on even though one is in a different part of the house and on a different circuit breaker panel.  I called PS Audio once and they gave me some troubleshooting tips but I need to rule this out.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Waiting for impressions...


----------



## rhern213 (Jun 26, 2018)

I just went through a week of going back and forth testing the Qutest with the OEM wall-wart, an iFi iPower, and a Poweradd battery pack.

I did not notice any difference whatsoever between the OEM wall-wart and the iFi iPower. I was skeptical of the iPower going in because I don't like the idea of counteracting noise by adding even more noise, but I figure for $50 it's worth a shot.

Now for the battery pack, I'd be hard pressed to say that I can really hear much of a difference either, especially since quick A/Bin'g of PS's is not possible. I do hear a tiny bit smoother roll-off in the higher frequencies, less of a hiss/scratchiness but extremely mild, and only on certain tracks. If I'm not specifically listening for that I wouldn't notice it. I can't really point to any other differences or improvements.

I am going to end up keeping the Poweradd battery pack now that I know the difference is there, no matter how unnoticeable it may be. And also it's a good accessory to have in general for other things. The Poweradd for the price is the largest capacity battery pack I found that has an easy to read display screen, can output 20v DC (16v to power my Auralic Mini), and has a micro-usb-b for the Qutest.

For reference my setup is: Auralic Mini -> Qutest -> Violectric v280 -> HE1000v2


----------



## Zzt231gr

rhern213 said:


> I just went through a week of going back and forth testing the Qutest with the OEM wall-wart, an iFi iPower, and a Poweradd battery pack.
> 
> I did not notice any difference whatsoever between the OEM wall-wart and the iFi iPower. I was skeptical of the iPower going in because I don't like the idea of counteracting noise by adding even more noise, but I figure for $50 it's worth a shot.
> 
> ...


Would you be able to tell the difference via a bling test?
How much does it cost?


----------



## rhern213

Zzt231gr said:


> Would you be able to tell the difference via a bling test?
> How much does it cost?



Passes the bling test for me, it's $90 on amazon, https://www.amazon.com/Poweradd-Pil...qid=1530046069&sr=8-1&keywords=poweradd+pro+2

They have a 32000mah version, but it doesn't look like it includes the micro USB adapter for some reason. So I went with the 23000 version just in case.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jun 28, 2018)

By any chance is anyone copying their vinyl to FLAC or similar?  If so what software or device are you using and what bit and frequency are you using?  My brother has an album they want $51 for the CD, seriously...

I have a Zoom H2n which will allow me to record 96kHz/24-bit wav


----------



## Triode User

dawktah2 said:


> By any chance is anyone copying their vinyl to FLAC or similar?  If so what software or device are you using and what bit and frequency are you using?  My brother has an album they want $51 for the CD, seriously...
> 
> I have a Zoom H2n which will allow me to record 96kHz/24-bit wav



Why not use Davina? My Chord dealer had a special offer and I picked one up for £99.


----------



## Amberlamps (Jun 28, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Why not use Davina? My Chord dealer had a special offer and I picked one up for £99.



Hook a brother up with a £99 Davina.

I will be generous, I will give you £100 and you can keep the change.

But only if the remote that comes with it, is really a tricorder from star trek.


----------



## dawktah2

Triode User said:


> Why not use Davina? My Chord dealer had a special offer and I picked one up for £99.



What is that?


----------



## Amberlamps

dawktah2 said:


> What is that?



If someone says, It’s Dave’s wife, they’re lieing.


----------



## dawktah2




----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> What is that?


It is a typo, it will cost more than £99, a lot more.


----------



## dawktah2

miketlse said:


> It is a typo, it will cost more than £99, a lot more.



 A few more 9's.  For those who won't have that...


----------



## blueninjasix

dawktah2 said:


> By any chance is anyone copying their vinyl to FLAC or similar?  If so what software or device are you using and what bit and frequency are you using?  My brother has an album they want $51 for the CD, seriously...
> 
> I have a Zoom H2n which will allow me to record 96kHz/24-bit wav


Software Vinyl studio does 96/24 and Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 hardware device connects turntable to PC via usb. and Vinyl studio edits out all pops and clicks from vinyl.


----------



## dawktah2

I listened to the Qutest using a battery pack and the buzz from HVAC is still there so will check with a completely different source and then no source. If still noise, PS Audio is going back.


----------



## Zzt231gr

dawktah2 said:


> I listened to the Qutest using a battery pack and the buzz from HVAC is still there so will check with a completely different source and then no source. If still noise, PS Audio is going back.


I don't have such problem using mine with stock PSU...


----------



## Mrandrade

Are you sure about the cause ofthe problem? I have no noise with it


----------



## STR-1

Not sure how new this review is - https://www.pursuitperfectsystem.com/chord-qutest-review.html


----------



## dawktah2

Its not the Qutest, Its more than likely something else.  I have decided to sell/trade my Qutest and get the TT2 when I have had a chance to audition. No pre-order on this.


----------



## Friscosfoe

. Hi, I’m a new owner of a qutest in my den system, with some questions. Upstairs and in my headphone system, I use schiit, Gumby and Bimby with audirvana software.
On the schiit Dacs i don’t use audirvana to oversample. It’s it recommended with the qutest not to oversample either. If not are any particular settings recommended for pre ringing etc in the AR software.

So far, I think I prefer no over sampling to max over sampling, but there are a lot of variables in play, including that I may still be in thr burn  in period.

How to people feel about using an eitr with the qutest?
.


----------



## miketlse

Friscosfoe said:


> . Hi, I’m a new owner of a qutest in my den system, with some questions. Upstairs and in my headphone system, I use schiit, Gumby and Bimby with audirvana software.
> On the schiit Dacs i don’t use audirvana to oversample. It’s it recommended with the qutest not to oversample either. If not are any particular settings recommended for pre ringing etc in the AR software.
> 
> So far, I think I prefer no over sampling to max over sampling, but there are a lot of variables in play, including that I may still be in thr burn  in period.
> ...


https://www.head-fi.org/search/10782093/?q=eitr&t=post&o=relevance&c[thread]=869417


----------



## sheldaze

Friscosfoe said:


> . Hi, I’m a new owner of a qutest in my den system, with some questions. Upstairs and in my headphone system, I use schiit, Gumby and Bimby with audirvana software.
> On the schiit Dacs i don’t use audirvana to oversample. It’s it recommended with the qutest not to oversample either. If not are any particular settings recommended for pre ringing etc in the AR software.
> 
> So far, I think I prefer no over sampling to max over sampling, but there are a lot of variables in play, including that I may still be in thr burn  in period.
> ...



From their technologies Chord has listed for the Qutest:

Galvanic Isolation removes any needs to bypass the USB. Direct USB would be recommended over Eitr.
If you have access to an M-Scaler, you could use that to feed a higher sample rate into the Qutest. Otherwise it would be advisable externally to feed just the native audio bit-rate into the DAC, and allow the technology of the Qutest to perform all the steps of D/A conversion internally. Do not upsample.
Where I disagree with what I have read from Chord is on burn in. I would never advise someone to keep something for a long period, but I think a week of playing music should be sufficient. It will sound different from your Bimby and Gumby. And you may still prefer these at the end of that time. Certainly if there is a return period of only a few days, use only that time. I noticed difference in using mine over the course of a week.


----------



## Friscosfoe

sheldaze said:


> From their technologies Chord has listed for the Qutest:
> 
> Galvanic Isolation removes any needs to bypass the USB. Direct USB would be recommended over Eitr.
> If you have access to an M-Scaler, you could use that to feed a higher sample rate into the Qutest. Otherwise it would be advisable externally to feed just the native audio bit-rate into the DAC, and allow the technology of the Qutest to perform all the steps of D/A conversion internally. Do not upsample.
> Where I disagree with what I have read from Chord is on burn in. I would never advise someone to keep something for a long period, but I think a week of playing music should be sufficient. It will sound different from your Bimby and Gumby. And you may still prefer these at the end of that time. Certainly if there is a return period of only a few days, use only that time. I noticed difference in using mine over the course of a week.



Thanks
I’m planning on keeping it. Sure it sounds little different but I need a good third dac and variety is the spice of life and then there is dsd.is there a link with the chord info or is it buried in this stream of 110 pages.


----------



## Friscosfoe

Friscosfoe said:


> Thanks
> I’m planning on keeping it. Sure it sounds little different but I need a good third dac and variety is the spice of life and then there is dsd.is there a link with the chord info or is it buried in this stream of 110 pages.



Forgot to ask do they reccomend against rendus and sotms etc too?


----------



## sheldaze

Friscosfoe said:


> Forgot to ask do they reccomend against rendus and sotms etc too?


 Try what you like, but purpose was to simplify life, much like the Gen V in the latest Schiit DACs.

I too use a couple different sources. Enjoy the spice


----------



## jwbrent (Jul 1, 2018)

I just ordered a Qutest and hope to have it 10 days from now.

I owned the original Hugo which played double duty as my speaker system DAC, and as my portable system DAC. I preferred it driving my LCD-XC than I did with my Focal 1008Be speakers, finding the Hugo to be a bit bright sounding with the Focals.

My main system has changed with the addition of the Raidho XT-1 loudspeakers. I still have my Luxman MQ-88 tube amplifier (not the Chinese made MQ-88a), and I can use the Qutest because the Luxman has a variable input with a front chassis mounted level control. My music source is a MacBook Air using Audirvana software.

The Qutest will replace my iDSD micro BL, and I expect there to be a big improvement, especially in resolving low level and transient detail. The iFi sounds very good considering its price, but I’m happy to have a DAC that is more commensurate with the rest of my system. More details to follow once I get my Qutest and get some play time on it ...


----------



## soares

I consider essential my Ultrarendu + a good PS to get the ultimate drop of juice from my DAC's including the Qutest. Never tried the sotms.


----------



## sasaki99

I just got the qutest, thinking about going up to Dave or to pair Blu mk 2 with the qutest. If I only want to use the Blu mk2 (pair with Qutest) as a playback from computer files only, what you guys think would be the better option. Any idea? I only have budget to go for Dave or Blu mk2 at a time. Thanks


----------



## Light - Man

sasaki99 said:


> I just got the qutest, thinking about going up to Dave or to pair Blu mk 2 with the qutest. If I only want to use the Blu mk2 (pair with Qutest) as a playback from computer files only, what you guys think would be the better option. Any idea? I only have budget to go for Dave or Blu mk2 at a time. Thanks



Why not give it some time before you decide where to go next.

A number of guys on here have said that they reckon that the sound improves after some burn-in time. 

There is speculation (or wishful thinking) that there will be a cheaper option to the Blu2.


----------



## dawktah2

sasaki99 said:


> I just got the qutest, thinking about going up to Dave or to pair Blu mk 2 with the qutest. If I only want to use the Blu mk2 (pair with Qutest) as a playback from computer files only, what you guys think would be the better option. Any idea? I only have budget to go for Dave or Blu mk2 at a time. Thanks



As a solution to a couple of my listening room issues, I am going to trade/sell my Qutest for the Hugo TT2. I was considering a couple of different amps but I can't justify all the additional expenses. It has been suggested that I get a PS Audio Power Plant to fix HVAC noise I posted about earlier...


----------



## azabu

sasaki99 said:


> I just got the qutest, thinking about going up to Dave or to pair Blu mk 2 with the qutest. If I only want to use the Blu mk2 (pair with Qutest) as a playback from computer files only, what you guys think would be the better option. Any idea? I only have budget to go for Dave or Blu mk2 at a time. Thanks



Spend a little time with the Qutest, I'm completely smitten with mine.


----------



## dawktah2

azabu said:


> Spend a little time with the Qutest, I'm completely smitten with mine.



I absolutely love mine, I just need another amp!


----------



## azabu

dawktah2 said:


> I absolutely love mine, I just need another amp!



I'd just get a Hugo 2 and run it off the internal batteries.


----------



## dawktah2

azabu said:


> I'd just get a Hugo 2 and run it off the internal batteries.



I thought about that, but no dual BNC.  I'd like to be a bit more future proof.


----------



## azabu

dawktah2 said:


> I thought about that, but no dual BNC.  I'd like to be a bit more future proof.



I think the m scaler can work off the coaxial and 3.5mm jack?

https://www.headphone-earphone.reviews/2017/09/04/chord-hugo-2-review-part-2/
On the other side, we still have the optical input, but the coaxial digital S/PDIF input now takes the space where one of the 3.5mm outputs was and uses a 3.5mm plug, which can be TS (tip and sleeve), TRS (tip-ring-sleeve) or TRRS (tip-ring-ring-sleeve). This is because there are now two coaxial digital inputs, allowing connection of a Chord M-scaler (which sends via both simultaneously).


----------



## dawktah2 (Jul 2, 2018)

azabu said:


> I think the m scaler can work off the coaxial and 3.5mm jack?
> 
> https://www.headphone-earphone.reviews/2017/09/04/chord-hugo-2-review-part-2/
> On the other side, we still have the optical input, but the coaxial digital S/PDIF input now takes the space where one of the 3.5mm outputs was and uses a 3.5mm plug, which can be TS (tip and sleeve), TRS (tip-ring-sleeve) or TRRS (tip-ring-ring-sleeve). This is because there are now two coaxial digital inputs, allowing connection of a Chord M-scaler (which sends via both simultaneously).



Is there a loaner program for the Hugo2? There have been reports that the Qutest sounds better than H2 and also, I'd hope the TT2 sounds better than both of them! Oh, and I have a WA8 so don't really need portability.


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> I thought about that, but no dual BNC.  I'd like to be a bit more future proof.


Yes it does have dual outputs for the MScaler.


----------



## dawktah2

miketlse said:


> Yes it does have dual outputs for the MScaler.



Outputs?  I thought it had to be 2 BNC input?


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> Outputs?  I thought it had to be 2 BNC input?


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...-official-thread.831345/page-58#post-13275190


----------



## azabu

dawktah2 said:


> Is there a loaner program for the Hugo2? There have been reports that the Qutest sounds better than H2 and also, I'd hope the TT2 sounds better than both of them! Oh, and I have a WA8 so don't really need portability.



I've auditioned the Hugo2 and it's as if your listening to the music without any electronics in the way. The sound is so clear, it takes conscious adjustment.

The Qutest is resolving, just more musical to my ears.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jul 3, 2018)

azabu said:


> I've auditioned the Hugo2 and it's as if your listening to the music without any electronics in the way. The sound is so clear, it takes conscious adjustment.
> 
> The Qutest is resolving, just more musical to my ears.



Thanks so much for that. I don't want to join yet another thread on the H2, but I am wondering if people have had any adverse events with TSA travelling with the H2.  I haven't been stopped only once with my WA8, and I'm PreCheck. I also, didn't want to connect/reconnect every time I leave town.  I'll be doing that with H2...


----------



## OctavianH (Jul 3, 2018)

I bought recently a Qutest and I am very pleased about it. It was an upgrade to the previous model, 2Qute.
I did not quite understood why it was not recommended for HPs and Rob Watts advised to get a Hugo 2 instead.
For me Qutest with a LPS is basicly a Hugo 2. Anyway, sounds very good here connected to a Feliks Audio Elise tube amp.


----------



## AlexB73

After long break-in Qutest has much darker tonal balance compared to 2qute.
Qutest tonal balance is more similar to Mojo.
Qutest has much more base and mid-base than 2qutes has.
I have to use different interconnect and power outlet (with brighter sound signature) to adjust Qutest to my system after using 2qute.  
Also, Qutest high frequencies are much detailed compared to 2qute. Sound is more clear and less digital.
Soundstage and musical instruments separation are better too.
But I can't see significant improvement in term of dynamic.


----------



## soares

I agree with eveything except the tonal balance. I find the 2qute  much darker then the Qutest. It must be related to the system used: STi5 + uR + amp Tac 88 modded + Proac Tablette Signature. Roon and HQplayer embedded


----------



## AlexB73

My system is not standard audiophile system.
Cary 303 Cd player as transport - 300B SET (6sn7, 6f6) integrated amplifier - Altec Linsing 604E vintage speakers.
I also have a second source - EMT948 turntable with EMT TSD15 cartridge, Sun Audio SAT1000 step-up transformer and EAR834p phonostage.
I think USB and coaxial inputs can sound different in term of tonal balance.


----------



## soares

Nice system you got Alex. Thank for sharing!


----------



## rhern213

OctavianH said:


> I bought recently a Qutest and I am very pleased about it. It was an upgrade to the previous model, 2Qute.
> I did not quite understood why it was not recommended for HPs and Rob Watts advised to get a Hugo 2 instead.
> For me Qutest with a LPS is basicly a Hugo 2. Anyway, sounds very good here connected to a Feliks Audio Elise tube amp.



Just to note, the reason Rob recommends the H2 over the Qutest is due to the benefits of running HP's directly out of the H2's op-amp, instead of outputting to an external amp.


----------



## Christer (Jul 4, 2018)

I have a couple of questions regarding Qutest via optical.
Having played some rbcds I accidentally found in a box in  a wardrobe a couple of days ago, I don't normally play rbcds, I noticed that my two CD players sound slightly different not only on their own,but also via Qutest.
And not only that,with one cd I played this morning the light from Qutest showed red with one and green with the other!
Indicating 16/44.1 with red and 96khz?with the other.
Could anybody explain what is going on?
I expected both cd players to sound basically identical via Qutest. They don't!
With my SACD/CD player playng either the redbook layer or a plain CD I get a warmer less typical low res signature ,digital sound than via the player that only accepts rbcds.
I have to say that in both cases rbcd sounds better via Qutest than directly via either of the two players.
But still inferior to hi res via Qutest. Most notable with massed strings and at orchestral  climaxes as usual with rbcd.
But it certainly whets my appetite to taste what an M-scaler might add to this equation.
Regarding hi res and optical via Qutest I would also like to know what would be needed to play my hi res files via optical.
My mbps have two little holes next to the usb ports . Is one of those actually an optical port?
Cheers Christer


----------



## Zzt231gr

There was a huge difference when I changed my old SACD player to Cambridge CXC!


----------



## AlexB73

All transport sound different.
The first reason the quality of digital output (jitter, noise).
The second reason, a noise that transport generates to AC.
Even with Cord DACs (that are not sensible to jitter), I can hear clearly a difference between different fuses in my transport or different legs under my transport.


----------



## Friscosfoe

Re the voltage settings, unlike some other posters , I found a huge difference. My system is a rouge Sphinx


----------



## Friscosfoe

oops system crashed on me. My system is a rogue sphinx with mullard tubes into little Harbeth P3ESRs. Rogue rates  input sensitivity at 1V, but on the 1V Chord setting I simply wasn't driving the Harbeths enough. At 3V, the system was unlistenable due to static/ hiss. But things sounded great at 2V. It strikes me as odd to publish an input sensitivity at 1 V, when the amp appears to be designed to operate at a 2V level, but maybe input sensitivity shouldn't match the actual input level.


----------



## Christer (Jul 5, 2018)

Friscosfoe said:


> Re the voltage settings, unlike some other posters , I found a huge difference. My system is a rouge Sphinx


In my still limited experience the  voltage settings do indeed make a difference.
But since I connect to different sources regularly I have so far  not come to the conclusion that there is  one ideal setting that works in my system.
With Qutest directly to my pream/amp and speaker at 1V with downloads I have to raise my volume to roughly12 o'clock with most recordings and get a slightly lower noise floor using the same setting with my main headphone amp and downloads.
At 3V I get a wee bit higher noise/hiss and sometimes overload issues.
The hiss is most noticable via headphones.
Am I correct in guessing the higher  gain setting from Qutest's output stage  is causing  hiss/noise to rise?
I can play at the same dB loudness level with less hiss with the 1V setting and my headphone amp has 4 dB better snr than Qutest on paper if I interpret things correctly.
As far as  common mains noise  is concerned my Benchmark headphone amp lists below 140dB. 
Quite an impressive figure.
But I can't find any similar measurement for Qutest.
With my main  speaker based system hiss is not a problem really,since I never listen with my ears close to the electrostatic panels but from a distance of at least 4-5 metres away.
I am happy that the settings are there. But I wish they just like the filters, had been adjustable via a remote.


----------



## Zzt231gr (Jul 5, 2018)

Christer said:


> In my still limited experience the  voltage settings do indeed make a difference.
> But since I connect to different sources regularly I have so far  not come to the conclusion that there is  one ideal setting that works in my system.
> With Qutest directly to my pream/amp and speaker at 1V with downloads I have to raise my volume to roughly12 o'clock with most recordings and get a slightly lower noise floor using the same setting with my main headphone amp and downloads.
> At 3V I get a wee bit higher noise/hiss and sometimes overload issues.
> ...


^^I would like to know too,but IIRC,Rob stated otherwise some time ago...


----------



## Rob Watts

The noise remains exactly the same absolute level with the three voltage settings - its a digital domain adjustment, no analogue changes whatsoever. The adjustment is to suit the pre-amp or amp overload issues, so it's entirely down to the connected amp as to which setting is best.


----------



## Zzt231gr (Jul 5, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> The noise remains exactly the same absolute level with the three voltage settings - its a digital domain adjustment, no analogue changes whatsoever. The adjustment is to suit the pre-amp or amp overload issues, so it's entirely down to the connected amp as to which setting is best.


Thank you for your fast answer!

So,3V remains the best for my passive preamp?


----------



## Rob Watts

Absolutely!


----------



## boxerlc (Jul 5, 2018)

Hi Rob,

I recently bought this qutest dac, when I tried to feed it with some 768KHz PCM or DSD512 audio stream output from HQplayer, I always heard very serious distortion, glitches, pure white noise on one channel(usually right) or audible white noise in the music background.

Could you tell me what might cause the problem?

I did some tests, hope they may be helpful:

1. when I play audio at 384Khz or DSD256, qutest has no problem.

2. mojo has the same issue when playing at highest possible sample rate(ex. 768KHz or DSD256 for mojo).

    2qute seems OK at DSD128 and PCM 384Khz.

3. I tried qutest with the stock cable and a very short USB cable I have, didn't see significant improvement.

4. I thought it might be my computer that has performance issue, but I tried it with other DAC(RME adi2 dac), it is capable of feeding DSD256 or PCM 768KHz smoothly. Issue happens only when chord product is used.


I know you don't recommend people using any upsampling software with chord dac, but I just want to do a comparison of 'qutest playing hqplayer dsd512 vs qutest playing bit-perfect audio'  in order to valid your point.

Thank you,

C


----------



## miketlse

boxerlc said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> I recently bought this qutest dac, when I tried to feed it with some 768KHz PCM or DSD512 audio stream output from HQplayer, I always heard very serious distortion, glitches, pure white noise on one channel(usually right) or audible white noise in the music background.
> 
> ...


Are you using a computer as a source?
This thread contains suggestions that HQplayer and DSD512 could easily overload some CPUs, and cause stuttering, or no sound at all.
https://community.roonlabs.com/t/not-able-to-get-all-filters-to-play-at-dsd512/14963


----------



## boxerlc (Jul 5, 2018)

miketlse said:


> Are you using a computer as a source?
> This thread contains suggestions that HQplayer and DSD512 could easily overload some CPUs, and cause stuttering, or no sound at all.
> https://community.roonlabs.com/t/not-able-to-get-all-filters-to-play-at-dsd512/14963


Thank you, as I said in number 4, my computer has enough procesing power for 44.1K to DSD256. I did encountered performance issue when processing 44.1K to DSD512, but i think my computer should be able to handle 44.1K to 705KHz or 48K to 768KHz without problem.


----------



## Paul Bjernklo

Zzt231gr said:


> There was a huge difference when I changed my old SACD player to Cambridge CXC!



Totally agree. Get a good cd transport if you still play CDs (like I do quite a lot). I would probably recommend the Cambridge CXC based on reviews. I have the Cyrus CD XT Signature which sounds sublime with my Hugo 2. I can clearly hear a difference between transports and I would assume they are all mostly bit perfect (?), so there is definitely more than only “bit perfect” in the equation...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Paul Bjernklo said:


> Totally agree. Get a good cd transport if you still play CDs (like I do quite a lot). I would probably recommend the Cambridge CXC based on reviews. I have the Cyrus CD XT Signature which sounds sublime with my Hugo 2. I can clearly hear a difference between transports and I would assume they are all mostly bit perfect (?), so there is definitely more than only “bit perfect” in the equation...


And CEC transports must be better but also much more expensive...


----------



## Rivendell

Zzt231gr said:


> And CEC transports must be better but also much more expensive...


Ok everyone ive read this as read some more so here my questions

Dont want to bore you with the back story and nuts really as this is a headphone forum and i havent used my cans and valve headamp for ages
But, its an excellent thread about this dac and likely the place to find answers to questions
I do have a QuteEX and a rather nice hand built LPS
The ugo is out for me cos i dont like its looks cables out the side indeed!
Im not looking for portable, im looking for fixed
So thatll be the Quetest then !
I adore what the dac has done to the sound improved even further by the LPS
So in the off chance, anyonecompared/upgraded from EX -Test
Comments etc

Thank you.


----------



## gordec

I got to audition the Qutest today at my local shop. I really like the sound. Didn't pull the trigger because I wasn't sure if I should get Hugo 2 or Qutest. If purely used a desktop DAC, Qutest is better than Hugo 2 right with 2 BNC inputs? Hugo 2 only has a mini coaxial and toslink. I do not USB because my PC's USB output is terrible.


----------



## plsvn

just read a post on CA stating all Chord DACs but Dave do convert DSD to PCM. Is this indeed true? :/


----------



## Zzt231gr

Has anyone noticed any crosstalk between coaxial and optical?I find it to be annoying and I don't know if this worsens sound quality.


----------



## boxerlc

gordec said:


> I got to audition the Qutest today at my local shop. I really like the sound. Didn't pull the trigger because I wasn't sure if I should get Hugo 2 or Qutest. If purely used a desktop DAC, Qutest is better than Hugo 2 right with 2 BNC inputs? Hugo 2 only has a mini coaxial and toslink. I do not USB because my PC's USB output is terrible.


USB is the best interface for qutest, theoretically it should have good performance regardless to your usb port quality as long as you feed the data fast enough. My personal experience is USB on qutest is better than coaxial, it should also be better than the coaxial on Hugo 2.

I think you have a good shot on qutest via USB.


----------



## Christer

Rob Watts said:


> The noise remains exactly the same absolute level with the three voltage settings - its a digital domain adjustment, no analogue changes whatsoever. The adjustment is to suit the pre-amp or amp overload issues, so it's entirely down to the connected amp as to which setting is best.


Thanks Rob, so I take it my headphone amp or maybe the difficulty of setting exactly the same loudnesss level is at play?  Could you also explain why via optical my two cd players sound so different?
I was under the impression that once connected to Qutest all ANY different  cd drives would do would be to feed the16/44.1 data to the DAC?
.
 PS.If you like Debussy's music I can recommend the Chandos/Debussy/Deneuve/ RSSO 24/96 download.
One of Chandos' best in recent years imho.
Cheers Christer currently enjoying my Qutest quite a bit.
No Canjam for me this time around. I am "babysitting" a dog for friends in July.


----------



## Rob Watts

I suspect that there are a number of issues on the headphone amp - but for sure the noise OP from Qutest is fixed.

Maybe the optical OP's are not bit perfect? Maybe the CD players are creating different RF noise upsetting the Headphone amp? Most likely explanation is each CD player has different error rates. One benefit of ripping is that you can get error free rips, that will always play back the same bit perfect data. I have always found optical to be consistently the same SQ, but I do not have many optical sources.

I like Chandos, so will investigate the Debussy...


----------



## soares

boxerlc said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> I recently bought this qutest dac, when I tried to feed it with some 768KHz PCM or DSD512 audio stream output from HQplayer, I always heard very serious distortion, glitches, pure white noise on one channel(usually right) or audible white noise in the music background.
> 
> ...


Same problem with mine. It's not computer related. Please see my post on this and others threads. Using my others Dacs, namely the one from OPPO 205, there is no problem. And yes the white noise comes always from the right channel...


----------



## boxerlc

Rob Watts said:


> I suspect that there are a number of issues on the headphone amp - but for sure the noise OP from Qutest is fixed.
> 
> Maybe the optical OP's are not bit perfect? Maybe the CD players are creating different RF noise upsetting the Headphone amp? Most likely explanation is each CD player has different error rates. One benefit of ripping is that you can get error free rips, that will always play back the same bit perfect data. I have always found optical to be consistently the same SQ, but I do not have many optical sources.
> 
> I like Chandos, so will investigate the Debussy...


Hi Rob,

Could you help me on post #1683 ?

Thank you

C


----------



## boxerlc

soares said:


> Same problem with mine. It's not computer related. Please see my post on this and others threads. Using my others Dacs, namely the one from OPPO 205, there is no problem. And yes the white noise comes always from the right channel...


Thank you,

Did you get any solution for this issue, I looked at you posts, couldn't find it.


----------



## ecwl

Christer said:


> Could you also explain why via optical my two cd players sound so different?


According to the Positive Feedback review of your Xindak SCD2, it upsamples CDs to 24/96. This is why your CD player sounds different than the Xindak. It also explains why Qutest is Red when playing off your CD player and Green when playing off your Xindak. Obviously you should let Qutest do the upsampling rather than the 2004 Xindak do it.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Zzt231gr said:


> Has anyone noticed any crosstalk between coaxial and optical?I find it to be annoying and I don't know if this worsens sound quality.


Bump


----------



## Christer (Jul 8, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> I suspect that there are a number of issues on the headphone amp - but for sure the noise OP from Qutest is fixed.
> 
> Maybe the optical OP's are not bit perfect? Maybe the CD players are creating different RF noise upsetting the Headphone amp? Most likely explanation is each CD player has different error rates. One benefit of ripping is that you can get error free rips, that will always play back the same bit perfect data. I have always found optical to be consistently the same SQ, but I do not have many optical sources.
> 
> I like Chandos, so will investigate the Debussy...



Thanks again, another question  for you or anybody who feels like responding.
What would be the best way to make sure one  actually gets error free rips from rbcds?
How does one confirm they are error free?
Considering how surprisingly listenable some of the rbcds I accidentally  found  in a wardrobe in my flat in town last weeks sound via Qutest and optical I am thinking of ripping the best.

My only in house option to rip is via the dvd/cd drive on my mbps.
But it captures everything as "unknown album" in iTunes where I store my music.
I would have to tag and label everything manuallly that way. Are there better  more automated ways?
Would that way be enough or are there big differences between rippers as well?

I think I have figured out why Qutest seems to receive a 96khz stream via one of the players though.
It has got an upsample function that initially could be engaged via a button on the front.
But quite a few years ago the player which originally played both rbcd/dvds/and SACD both stereo and mch, stopped working altogether.
After sending it for repair it came back playing only rbcds.
Since I had another better player at hand and only rarely played discs by then anyway I haven't bothered to send it back again. But maybe they left the upsampling function on?
The light originally indicating upsampling is not on though.
But all rbcds I have played so far seem to be read as 24/96khz streams by Qutest?
Qutest lights up firmly green.
The other player indicates red native sample rate and is the one I prefer. I know you advice against upsampling outside your DACs too.
Cheers Christer still in awe over  how  the deep deep bass of last night's BIG live church organ recital made my whole body tremble.


----------



## Christer

ecwl said:


> According to the Positive Feedback review of your Xindak SCD2, it upsamples CDs to 24/96. This is why your CD player sounds different than the Xindak. It also explains why Qutest is Red when playing off your CD player and Green when playing off your Xindak. Obviously you should let Qutest do the upsampling rather than the 2004 Xindak do it.



Thanks for your input but  the case is EXACTLY the opposite of what you suggest. My Xindak  SCD-2 seems to send native 16/44.1 to Qutest but my Philips player seems to send 24/96! 
Qutest lights up green with the Philips player and red with the Xindak.
Cheers Christer


----------



## gordec (Jul 6, 2018)

boxerlc said:


> USB is the best interface for qutest, theoretically it should have good performance regardless to your usb port quality as long as you feed the data fast enough. My personal experience is USB on qutest is better than coaxial, it should also be better than the coaxial on Hugo 2.
> 
> I think you have a good shot on qutest via USB.



I just wonder if the mini coaxial on the Hugo 2 is same quality as the BNC on the Qutest. From my research other than that, SQ is very similar between Hugo 2 and Qutest purely as a DAC.


----------



## miketlse

Christer said:


> Thanks again, another question  for you or anybody who feels like responding.
> What would be the best way to make sure one  actually gets error free rips from rbcds?
> How does one confirm they are error free?
> Considering how surprisingly listenable some of the rbcds I accidentally  found  in a wardrobe in my flat in town last weeks sound via Qutest and optical I am thinking of ripping the best.
> ...


I use Exact Audio Copy software that is free to download. At the end of the rip, it will create a log telling you whether the rip matches the file original file metadata details, or whether there is any deviation/inaccuracy. I borrow some CDs from my mediatheque, and some discs look scratched to the eye but rip 100% accurately, but a few others look perfect to the eye, but rip with a few errors.


----------



## Christer

miketlse said:


> I use Exact Audio Copy software that is free to download. At the end of the rip, it will create a log telling you whether the rip matches the file original file metadata details, or whether there is any deviation/inaccuracy. I borrow some CDs from my mediatheque, and some discs look scratched to the eye but rip 100% accurately, but a few others look perfect to the eye, but rip with a few errors.


Thanks for your input. I'll take a lok at it later. Now I feel like  have played so many less than perfect rbcds in the last couple of days that I need to listen more to LPs and hi res again,especially after last night's  live organ recital.
I don't really need to rip things until before I leave Sweden again in the autumn when I will listen more forgivingly via headphones all the time again..
Cheers Christer


----------



## AlexB73 (Jul 6, 2018)

I did compassion on Chord 2qute -
1. Play rip file from Mac (with Amarra SW) connected by USB.
2. Play CD from  (CD Player Cary 303/mk1) connected by coaxial.
CD player outperformed Mac by miles.

You should spend tones of money to make you computer sound better than average CD transport.


----------



## soares

boxerlc said:


> Thank you,
> 
> Did you get any solution for this issue, I looked at you posts, couldn't find it.


In order to alleviate the problem avoid interrupting the song you're playing... I am living with this for at least 2 months. Tried everything  else I could imagine without success.


----------



## gordec (Jul 6, 2018)

So is it generally accepted the Qutest is superior to Hugo2 for desktop purposes? I’m having a real hard time deciding. Hugo 2 doesn’t have variable power output and BNC.


----------



## x RELIC x

gordec said:


> Hugo 2 doesn’t have variable power output



Sure it does, it’s called the volume control.


----------



## gordec

x RELIC x said:


> Sure it does, it’s called the volume control.



Ha.


----------



## emrelights1973

gordec said:


> So is it generally accepted the Qutest is superior to Hugo2 for desktop purposes? I’m having a real hard time deciding. Hugo 2 doesn’t have variable power output and BNC.



Battery powered and a good headphone amp for Hugo 2

How about qutest? What is the advantage in desktop use?


----------



## DBB1

Has anyone compared this DAC to the LKS MH-DA004 or the Gustard x22 Pro? I would consider buying this DAC, but it is not easy to find comparative reviews or a dealer to hear a demo.


----------



## jayz

AlexB73 said:


> I did compassion on Chord 2qute -
> 1. Play rip file from Mac (with Amarra SW) connected by USB.
> 2. Play CD from  (CD Player Cary 303/mk1) connected by coaxial.
> CD player outperformed Mac by miles.
> ...



Nowadays, there is a whole new generation of digital front ends that are superior in performance and rich in features compared to computer playback or cd transports and some like the auralic aries mini offer good value for money not to mention poly/2go type players that are potentially even more future proof. I just cannot see any advantage of cd transports or macs in this day and age.


----------



## daredevil_kk

jayz said:


> Nowadays, there is a whole new generation of digital front ends that are superior in performance and rich in features compared to computer playback or cd transports and some like the auralic aries mini offer good value for money not to mention poly/2go type players that are potentially even more future proof. I just cannot see any advantage of cd transports or macs in this day and age.


I understand your point, but I’m old school. I like to stand at the rack and pull out the cd and read the booklet while listening to the CD even though I have an Aurender N10. BTW, there are still some transports that still outperform many digital front ends like the old Toshiba SD-9200 and the Project CD Box RS.


----------



## agedbest

DBB1 said:


> Has anyone compared this DAC to the LKS MH-DA004 or the Gustard x22 Pro? I would consider buying this DAC, but it is not easy to find comparative reviews or a dealer to hear a demo.



i heard LKS with last improvement upgrade......... not in the same system, unfortunately it will be very difficult ... impossible from a sample room retailer.
but for what i heard,  i think it easy outperform Qutest.
take a look also of R2R DAC, this type of DAC has high price for complex production ...... but you are already evaluating some China DAC.... there is a Singapore firm with lower price for this tipe of DAC...if you don't use extreme upsamples is the best DAC i heard in a 3000$ range... very natural sound. looks Venus model ...if it can be in your range.


----------



## DBB1

Thanks. I will research the Venus.


----------



## boxerlc

For desktop use, Qutest is cheaper then HUGO 2, so I guess that is one of the advantage. 

I used to think galvanic isolation is a design to improve USB performance, but if galvanic isolation design is better, why doesn't HUGO 2 have it?
Is there any trade-off for use galvanic isolation?


----------



## jwbrent

Question for Qutest users: is there a USB cable you would recommend that can be purchased with a 6” or thereabouts length?

My Qutest arrives tomorrow, and since it will be located next to my MacBook Air (repurposed as a server), I’d like a short USB cable with audiophile pretensions.


----------



## STR-1

jwbrent said:


> Question for Qutest users: is there a USB cable you would recommend that can be purchased with a 6” or thereabouts length?
> 
> My Qutest arrives tomorrow, and since it will be located next to my MacBook Air (repurposed as a server), I’d like a short USB cable with audiophile pretensions.



Slightly longer than six inches but Curious do a very good 200mm cable - http://www.curiouscables.com/buy.html


----------



## jwbrent

STR-1 said:


> Slightly longer than six inches but Curious do a very good 200mm cable - http://www.curiouscables.com/buy.html



That would work, although I wonder about the stiffness of the Curious cable ...


----------



## STR-1 (Jul 9, 2018)

jwbrent said:


> That would work, although I wonder about the stiffness of the Curious cable ...


Curious have an excellent returns policy.  They will even pay for return postage.  So no risk if it doesn’t work for you.


----------



## jwbrent

STR-1 said:


> Curious have an excellent returns policy.  They will even pay for return postage.  So no risk if it doesn’t work for you.



Yep, that works too. Thank you!


----------



## STR-1

jwbrent said:


> Yep, that works too. Thank you!


I should have mentioned it is only that flexible sideways.  So what you are connecting needs to be on the same level.


----------



## jwbrent

STR-1 said:


> I should have mentioned it is only that flexible sideways.  So what you are connecting needs to be on the same level.



That shouldn’t be a problem. My MacBook Air and the Qutest will be on the same shelf although the Qutest’s USB input may be an inch or so higher than the Air’s USB. I’ll know tomorrow.


----------



## GSP_

Headfonia review of the qutest: https://www.headfonia.com/review-chord-electronics-qutest/


----------



## gordec

I just purchased the Qutest. I want to use the BNC input. I have a good RCA Coaxial cable. Has anyone used one of the cheap RCA->BNC adapters. I don't want to buy a new cable.


----------



## Triode User

gordec said:


> I just purchased the Qutest. I want to use the BNC input. I have a good RCA Coaxial cable. Has anyone used one of the cheap RCA->BNC adapters. I don't want to buy a new cable.



I have used these Audioquest ones before and they were fine.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AudioQuest-adapter-female-Discontinued-Manufacturer/dp/B0009MFRVQ


----------



## Christer

GSP_ said:


> Headfonia review of the qutest: https://www.headfonia.com/review-chord-electronics-qutest/


Yet another of those many "HIFI" reviews on the safe side that don't even once  mention any  music genres used or resolutions or other  vital aspects that would be of any help to me.
Luckily I don't need to go by  reviews like this.
Most reviewers these days listen to synthetic pop/rock. Only a few, oldtimers mainly, still have acoustic music as a reference and main listening material. But yes this guy stays on the really safe side of the debate by not using any music at all it seems?
Or did I miss something  quickly browsing through the review?


----------



## Ultrainferno

Personally I really don't like reviews based on songs (you don't know), but some people really do. To each his own


----------



## AlexB73 (Jul 10, 2018)

Christer said:


> Yet another of those many "HIFI" reviews on the safe side that don't even once  mention any  music genres used or resolutions or other  vital aspects that would be of any help to me.
> Luckily I don't need to go by  reviews like this.
> Most reviewers these days listen to synthetic pop/rock. Only a few, oldtimers mainly, still have acoustic music as a reference and main listening material. But yes this guy stays on the really safe side of the debate by not using any music at all it seems?
> Or did I miss something  quickly browsing through the review?


I also was wandering when I visited Montreal audio show, why most of audiophile people today listen such kind of junk music. A big part of music where played, was hardly processed vocal plus electronically synthesized accompaniment.
The same kind of music I see a lot in YouTube hi-end audio equipment videos.
I have two question:
1. How can you review any kind of audio equipment based on this kind of music?
2. Why do you need to spend so mach money for audio equipment to listen this garbage music mastered for boomboxes?


----------



## jwbrent

GSP_ said:


> Headfonia review of the qutest: https://www.headfonia.com/review-chord-electronics-qutest/



Nice review. I get my Qutest today, but I won’t do much listening until I get some play time on it. My Raidhos are known for its huge soundstage, so I anticipate a perfect match with my new DAC.

Very excited!


----------



## jwbrent

AlexB73 said:


> I have two question:
> 1. How can you review any kind of audio equipment based on this kind of music?
> 2. Why do you need to spend so mach money for audio equipment to listen this garbage music mastered for boomboxes?



I think we may be generalizing here. I listen to all genres of music, and great recordings are not limited to acoustic or classical. For me, the whole purpose of this hobby of ours is to bring me closer to the artist, whatever kind of music it is.


----------



## OctavianH

Guys, what RCA cables are you using for Qutest connection to the amp? I tried here Chord C-Line 0.5m:







Then I tried a QED Performance 40 1m:






The Chord C Line is somehow warmer and has a bigger soundstage but the QED Performance 40 is more analytical and somehow colder, maybe a little bit more detailed in the detriment of musicality. The C Line is new and I will let it run for a few hours before making a final assessment, but I would like to know what other cables are you using, and of course, if you have an opinion about these two. Thanks!


----------



## AlexB73

jwbrent said:


> I think we may be generalizing here. I listen to all genres of music, and great recordings are not limited to acoustic or classical. For me, the whole purpose of this hobby of ours is to bring me closer to the artist, whatever kind of music it is.



I didn't mean, rock music from 60x-70x or blues music. A big part of this music was talented, well played and not bad recorded.
At least at 70th, most of people played music on home speakers. 

But a big part of music played by modern audiophile is a junk pop-music.
And the worst of all, modern speaker and headphone designers try to design their product to match this kind of music.
They try to make base as deep as possible and high frequencies as bright as possible at the expense of mid-range and sensitivity.


----------



## dawktah2

OctavianH said:


> Guys, what RCA cables are you using for Qutest connection to the amp? I tried here Chord C-Line 0.5m:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm using Chord C-Line as well.


----------



## alanb

AlexB73 said:


> I didn't mean, rock music from 60x-70x or blues music. A big part of this music was talented, well played and not bad recorded.
> At least at 70th, most of people played music on home speakers.
> 
> But a big part of music played by modern audiophile is a junk pop-music.
> ...



But it's the sacred duty of every generation to make music their parents hate.

You may not remember what people born in the thirties and forties said about rock music from the sixties and seventies - it wasn't generally complimentary.


----------



## jwbrent

alanb said:


> But it's the sacred duty of every generation to make music their parents hate.
> 
> You may not remember what people born in the thirties and forties said about rock music from the sixties and seventies - it wasn't generally complimentary.



Yes, it seems that way with generational music, but I’m very surprised these days that so many millennials that I come into contact with enjoy music I grew up with from the 70s on.

Anyway, I enjoy music going back to the 40s (e.g., big band, jazz) to the most current stuff. Music is my number one passion in life.


----------



## AlexB73

alanb said:


> But it's the sacred duty of every generation to make music their parents hate.
> 
> You may not remember what people born in the thirties and forties said about rock music from the sixties and seventies - it wasn't generally complimentary.



The music I told about is not modern. The are a lot such junk music from 70x and 80x too.
You can watch a number of different audiophile system videos in YouTube, and you will understand what I'm talking about...


----------



## jayz

AlexB73 said:


> I didn't mean, rock music from 60x-70x or blues music. A big part of this music was talented, well played and not bad recorded.
> At least at 70th, most of people played music on home speakers.
> 
> But a big part of music played by modern audiophile is a junk pop-music.
> ...



It is a complicated drawing so I wouldn't use a broad paintbrush.

Clearly the smartphone generation of today is where the money is so it is not right to blame the music industry alone or the portable mass market equipment designers for that matter.. I think it is also the collective failure of the hi-end community and its supporting industry which failed to get their side of the message across. But fortunately for us, we have the likes of Chord Electronics who are showing a new way of doing things so there is hope, its not all doom and gloom.


----------



## dawktah2

The jazz pianist Joe Sample's album "Invitation" from 1993 is a very good blend of jazz piano and orchestra accompaniment. Give a listen and if a similar recommendation for me and others to try please post.


----------



## jwbrent

My Qutest arrived yesterday and is getting some run time before I do any critical listening. Next up will likely be a 200mm Curious USB to connect the Qutest to the MacBook Air.

I want to thank Alan and Jason at The Source AV for taking good care of me on my visit to their showroom. Impressive array of high end headphones and electronics!


----------



## STR-1

jwbrent said:


> My Qutest arrived yesterday and is getting some run time before I do any critical listening. Next up will likely be a 200mm Curious USB to connect the Qutest to the MacBook Air.
> 
> I want to thank Alan and Jason at The Source AV for taking good care of me on my visit to their showroom. Impressive array of high end headphones and electronics!



Neat setup, and nice artwork.


----------



## Christer

OctavianH said:


> Guys, what RCA cables are you using for Qutest connection to the amp? I tried here Chord C-Line 0.5m:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nice to see some decent sharp hi res photography here that makes it possible to see things in detail compared to some of the videos posted here recently.
As far as rca cables go it does indeed seem like they matter and that Qutest scales well.
When I bought my Qutest I also bought the next level up from the ones you have in your system obviously.
I can't say how the Chord  Clearway I bought and yours compare ,but I have the Clearway which I used for the duration of my travels in Asia just to be able to listen to my Qutest via my Benchmark headphone amp.
Though after having compared it via my main large speaker based system with electrostatic speakers and 900watts per channel amp I can clearly hear  that yes the Clearway is good but Colorado is better and Chord  Indigo Blue is even better in my system.


OctavianH said:


> Guys, what RCA cables are you using for Qutest connection to the amp? I tried here Chord C-Line 0.5m:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## OctavianH

Many thanks @Christer for the recommendation but for me an important factor is also flexibility. As you can see in the picture I do not have very much space between my tube amp and the Qutest.
What can you tell me about the Clearway regarding this aspect? I might take into consideration to buy it if I will know that is has a decent flexibility and it might fit into the space the C Line has now.
I know that this should not be a main choosing factor but we have to live with what we have and my current setup is located on my gaming rig desk, and it looks somehow like:






Until I will be able to obtain more space or rearange stuff I will have to deal with space limitation.


----------



## jwbrent

STR-1 said:


> Neat setup, and nice artwork.



Thank you!


----------



## dawktah2

AlexB73 said:


> The music I told about is not modern. The are a lot such junk music from 70x and 80x too.
> You can watch a number of different audiophile system videos in YouTube, and you will understand what I'm talking about...



Sorry I meant to post to you as a reply:

The jazz pianist Joe Sample's album "Invitation" from 1993 is a very good blend of jazz piano and orchestra accompaniment. Give a listen and if a similar recommendation for me and others to try please post. 

What are your not junk recommendations?


----------



## gordec

Anyone has any recommendations in terms of fixing the USB output from PC? I currently using Alienware R7 i5-8600-> Jriver Media -> DAC -> MHA100.

For every DAC I have tried, Gumby, Qutest, MHA100 integrated, ifi Black Label, the sound will sometimes clip and stutter. Also the output is clearly noisier than the Toslink and Coaxial from the R7. I have tried moving music to PCie NME drive, turn on virus scanner, messing with all setting, but the end result is the same. Is it possible that the USB implementation is just poor for the R7? I also tried Foobar, BTW, same thing. I thought about getting something like Singxer or ifi microUSB 3.0 to clean up the signal, but if the original output is crappy, how much can you “clean.”


----------



## AlexB73 (Jul 11, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> Sorry I meant to post to you as a reply:
> 
> The jazz pianist Joe Sample's album "Invitation" from 1993 is a very good blend of jazz piano and orchestra accompaniment. Give a listen and if a similar recommendation for me and others to try please post.
> 
> What are your not junk recommendations?


To many staff to recommend... I have 2500 CDs and 700LPs at home. I don't use streaming.
I just bought 5 Original Albums at Blue Note of Herbie Hancock
And "Chet" LP of Chet Baker.
I also listened a lot of classical.
My latest favorites:
The Heifetz / Piatigorsky Concerts - Album Collection
and
Busch Quartet - Beethoven late quartets. CD remastered by Pearl


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^What about "Art Pepper meets the rhythm section"?I find this recording superb!


----------



## azabu (Jul 12, 2018)

gordec said:


> Anyone has any recommendations in terms of fixing the USB output from PC? I currently using Alienware R7 i5-8600-> Jriver Media -> DAC -> MHA100.
> 
> For every DAC I have tried, Gumby, Qutest, MHA100 integrated, ifi Black Label, the sound will sometimes clip and stutter. Also the output is clearly noisier than the Toslink and Coaxial from the R7. I have tried moving music to PCie NME drive, turn on virus scanner, messing with all setting, but the end result is the same. Is it possible that the USB implementation is just poor for the R7? I also tried Foobar, BTW, same thing. I thought about getting something like Singxer or ifi microUSB 3.0 to clean up the signal, but if the original output is crappy, how much can you “clean.”



I'd recommend the Iso Regen or original Regen by Uptone, it's a cheap improvement to recondition the USB signal and well worth the investment. Have a read of a few threads on Computer Audiophile. If you can swing it, also pick up the LPS 1.2 as a bundle pack. You can use the LPS 1.2 on either the Qutest or the Iso Regen.

Roon has a headroom management to minimise clipping, you could always trial the software.


----------



## naynay (Oct 3, 2018)

gordec said:


> Anyone has any recommendations in terms of fixing the USB output from PC? I currently using Alienware R7 i5-8600-> Jriver Media -> DAC -> MHA100.
> 
> For every DAC I have tried, Gumby, Qutest, MHA100 integrated, ifi Black Label, the sound will sometimes clip and stutter. Also the output is clearly noisier than the Toslink and Coaxial from the R7. I have tried moving music to PCie NME drive, turn on virus scanner, messing with all setting, but the end result is the same. Is it possible that the USB implementation is just poor for the R7? I also tried Foobar, BTW, same thing. I thought about getting something like Singxer or ifi microUSB 3.0 to clean up the signal, but if the original output is crappy, how much can you “clean.”



Cheapest option to try and this converts USB to Digital Coaxial at 384khz to connect to BNC input on  Qutest which is the maximum and woks fine as using it myself.

http://cpc.farnell.com/cyp/au-d6-384/usb-dac-384khz-24-bit/dp/AV27094?CMP=TREML007-005


----------



## Rhinomyte76

gordec said:


> Anyone has any recommendations in terms of fixing the USB output from PC? I currently using Alienware R7 i5-8600-> Jriver Media -> DAC -> MHA100.
> 
> For every DAC I have tried, Gumby, Qutest, MHA100 integrated, ifi Black Label, the sound will sometimes clip and stutter. Also the output is clearly noisier than the Toslink and Coaxial from the R7. I have tried moving music to PCie NME drive, turn on virus scanner, messing with all setting, but the end result is the same. Is it possible that the USB implementation is just poor for the R7? I also tried Foobar, BTW, same thing. I thought about getting something like Singxer or ifi microUSB 3.0 to clean up the signal, but if the original output is crappy, how much can you “clean.”



Before you go out and spend more money on gear you may want to consider the following:
a) PCs in general and usb ports in particular can be particularly noisy. However, there are some things that can help.  You may want to mess around with your port assignments on device manager to see if you can tell if "loud" devices like mice and keyboards and other peripherals are running off the same one as your audio.  Additionally, programs like fidelizer can reduce background activities which may help.  There is a free version without all the bells and whistles.   http://www.fidelizer-audio.com/ Also, I am a long time supporter of JRiver, but it is more susceptible to background noise than some programs in my experience.  HQPlayer is very quiet, and again you can run a trial version without dropping any cash. https://www.signalyst.com/consumer.html   Not nearly as sexy or user friendly as JRiver but the sound and silence is better I think.   Finally, is your PC sharing the same power source with your audio?  Often with PC's the power sharing of the PC, Audio, peripherals, etc can create noise. At a minimum, I may try plugging the DAC into a different wall socket than that running my PC power strip to see if that makes a change. Some people have had a lot of success with the IFi's AC purifier.  If you are in the states you could order it on amazon risk free, try it, and if it has no effect, return it.  https://www.amazon.com/IFI-iPurifier-Mains-Audio-Eliminator/dp/B07835J8XF  One last comment, I wouldn't rule out the effect of something like Micro USB 3.0 or the ISO Regen, or different USB cables that isolate the data and the power signals for that matter.  My bet is that your data is coming from the PC just fine, its just coming with a lot of crap too.  You have to strip that crap away.   Often, this is trial and error.  Also, you will get to the point of diminishing returns on investment.  Good luck.


----------



## gordec

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Before you go out and spend more money on gear you may want to consider the following:
> a) PCs in general and usb ports in particular can be particularly noisy. However, there are some things that can help.  You may want to mess around with your port assignments on device manager to see if you can tell if "loud" devices like mice and keyboards and other peripherals are running off the same one as your audio.  Additionally, programs like fidelizer can reduce background activities which may help.  There is a free version without all the bells and whistles.   http://www.fidelizer-audio.com/ Also, I am a long time supporter of JRiver, but it is more susceptible to background noise than some programs in my experience.  HQPlayer is very quiet, and again you can run a trial version without dropping any cash. https://www.signalyst.com/consumer.html   Not nearly as sexy or user friendly as JRiver but the sound and silence is better I think.   Finally, is your PC sharing the same power source with your audio?  Often with PC's the power sharing of the PC, Audio, peripherals, etc can create noise. At a minimum, I may try plugging the DAC into a different wall socket than that running my PC power strip to see if that makes a change. Some people have had a lot of success with the IFi's AC purifier.  If you are in the states you could order it on amazon risk free, try it, and if it has no effect, return it.  https://www.amazon.com/IFI-iPurifier-Mains-Audio-Eliminator/dp/B07835J8XF  One last comment, I wouldn't rule out the effect of something like Micro USB 3.0 or the ISO Regen, or different USB cables that isolate the data and the power signals for that matter.  My bet is that your data is coming from the PC just fine, its just coming with a lot of crap too.  You have to strip that crap away.   Often, this is trial and error.  Also, you will get to the point of diminishing returns on investment.  Good luck.



Thanks. I haven't tried those things you mentioned. I'm going to try. You think stuttering and hanging off music playback can also be explained by noise? These issues only happen with USB DAC never when I play directly from the sound card.


----------



## Rhinomyte76

gordec said:


> Thanks. I haven't tried those things you mentioned. I'm going to try. You think stuttering and hanging off music playback can also be explained by noise? These issues only happen with USB DAC never when I play directly from the sound card.



Hard to diagnose, but I would suspect that it is a faulty USB cable or JRiver.  Prior to the most recent update, I was getting occasional clipping.  Also, you can increase the chances of this depending upon your settings. I'd be curious to see what happens if you went back to the prior version that has had a lot of time and updates to flush out the bugs.  How often does this happen? Have you given your sound card an even comparison in terms of time? 

Also, your sound card is presumably attached via PCIe, which has no issue.  You could use something like this https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboard-Accessory/USB_31_TYPEA_CARD/  which would also use PCIE, and would ensure that no other devices are running off the same USB controller.  Finally, it would rule out the issue of having faulty USB ports.   Speaking of which, Have you tried difference USB ports on your pc.  2.0 vs. 3.0. for example.  It would be interested to see what if any effect changing the port had.  IFi for example recommends older generation ports when people are having issues with their products.


----------



## gordec

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Hard to diagnose, but I would suspect that it is a faulty USB cable or JRiver.  Prior to the most recent update, I was getting occasional clipping.  Also, you can increase the chances of this depending upon your settings. I'd be curious to see what happens if you went back to the prior version that has had a lot of time and updates to flush out the bugs.  How often does this happen? Have you given your sound card an even comparison in terms of time?
> 
> Also, your sound card is presumably attached via PCIe, which has no issue.  You could use something like this https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboard-Accessory/USB_31_TYPEA_CARD/  which would also use PCIE, and would ensure that no other devices are running off the same USB controller.  Finally, it would rule out the issue of having faulty USB ports.   Speaking of which, Have you tried difference USB ports on your pc.  2.0 vs. 3.0. for example.  It would be interested to see what if any effect changing the port had.  IFi for example recommends older generation ports when people are having issues with their products.



It shouldn't be jriver because foobar does the same thing. I have tried 2 different USB cables and switching between USB 2.0 and 3.0. however, I use the 2 other usb2.0 ports for keyboard and mouse. I'm going to try to unplug them all. I think buying a separate pcie USB card makes a lot of sense. Thanks.


----------



## gordec

Anyone know what's the best output level for Qutest to feed MHA100 based on specs? The specifications for the amp is: 
Sensitivity (Unbalanced): 300mV
Sensitivity (Balanced): 600mV
Signal To Noise Ratio: 105dB
Input Impedance (Balanced / Unbalanced):  25K/25K

I'm not sure how to interpret it. I feel 3V sounds the best when I'm playing around it.


----------



## TheNidz

jwbrent said:


> Question for Qutest users: is there a USB cable you would recommend that can be purchased with a 6” or thereabouts length?
> My Qutest arrives tomorrow, and since it will be located next to my MacBook Air (repurposed as a server), I’d like a short USB cable with audiophile pretensions.



Wireworld offers USB cables in 0.3m lengths.
I use an Ultraviolet7 ($46) which I'm very happy with, but you can go lower (Chroma@$23) or higher (Starlight7@$85) or even _much_ higher. 
('Zon prices.)

P.S. Is your amp a Luxman?


----------



## jwbrent

TheNidz said:


> Wireworld offers USB cables in 0.3m lengths.
> I use an Ultraviolet7 ($46) which I'm very happy with, but you can go lower (Chroma@$23) or higher (Starlight7@$85) or even _much_ higher.
> ('Zon prices.)
> 
> P.S. Is your amp a Luxman?



Thank you for your cable suggestions.

Yes, it is a Luxman MQ-88, a 40 watt per channel KT88 based amp.


----------



## gordec (Jul 15, 2018)

stevedlu said:


> First of all, the stock psu sounds FANTASTIC. It has a very lush tonal presentation, warmest of what i tried, i can see why they chose this for stock. ifi iPower 5v provides a much faster/precise and neutral sound. At this point you can go either way depending on taste and setup. (both same size & weight). Now the $400 uptone audio LPS 1.2..... dynamics are compressed, midrange becomes more distant, a sense of 3D is now flattened, I can see someone saying that this sounds more "analog" but to me it just sounds underpowered and noisy. I'm not bothering with a power bank because I do not want to deal with the use/recharge.
> 
> To me the differences are not subtle or hard to hear. To those that yell "but Rob Watts Says the PSU doesnt matter!" the stock psu does in-fact sound great so have fun listening to a great DAC. For the rest...well I cant wait to try some more power supplies once I get bored and the "upgrade/change itch" sets in.
> 
> Qutest>CMA600i>LCD-3



I'm so glad I saw your comment. I got the Qutest last Friday after auditioning it. My unit came with iFi iPower as free throw in, so I never bothered with the stock PSU. I was pretty disappointment because, even though the Qutest sounded technically good, it sounded digital and thin compared to what I remembered. I was changing different inputs, etc, not sure what was going on.  Now I switched to the stock PSU, it sounds so much better to me. The natural and analogue qualities are all back. Never knew the power supply can make this much difference.

I guess before you run off and drop more dough on a fancy power supply give the stock PSU a try.


----------



## jwbrent

gordec said:


> I'm so glad I saw your comment. I got the Qutest last Friday after auditioning it. My unit came with iFi iPower as free throw in, so I never bothered with the stock PSU. I was pretty disappointment because, even though the Qutest sounded technically good, it sounded digital and thin compared to what I remembered. I was changing different inputs, etc, not sure what was going on.  Now I switched to the stock PSU, it sounds so much better to me. The natural and analogue qualities are all back. Never knew the power supply can make this much difference.
> 
> I guess before you run off and drop more dough on a fancy power supply give the stock PSU a try.



Nice to read the stock PSU works well. My new Qutest has been running 24/7 since I picked it up last Tuesday. I’ve given it a listen a couple times and the one quality that really comes through is the liquid nature of the upper frequencies; coupled with my Raidho’s ribbon tweeters, the delicacy of the trebles is quite stunning. 

Although the subject of burn-in is fraught with controversy, my experience has always been that DACs benefit from being left on all the time and do require some play time before they sound their best.


----------



## AlexB73

I reported on this forum, that Qutest has much darker sound signature compared to 2Qute.
And it was true after 250 hours break-in with music played 24/7 from my computer.
After that I moved Qutest into a basement where is my main system stays.
I connected it to CD transport by coaxial cable and I leaved Qutest plugged in and CD transport switched on for 2 weeks.
I didn't expect the sound can be changed significantly after 250 hours of break-in.
It was a big surprise for me, because sound of Qutest opened up, became more dynamic and brighter.
Tonal balance now is more similar to 2Qute but more extended on frequency extremes.
Base become more natural without emphasizing of mid-base.
So I need to do more detailed comparison to 2Qute again.


----------



## Lodwales81

Hello all, purchased my qutest around 2 weeks ago replacing my schiit bitfrost which was connected to a eitr. My honest opinion is that the qutest isn't a massive upgrade but a subtle one . Just a few questions if anybody can help, I can't tell any difference when I change the filters so I just leave it on the white led. Also should I go USB from my mac into qutest or is my schiit eitr a better USB interface. I have tried switching between the two but not difference the eitr is limited to 24 bit 192 with spdif output. 

My setups 
Mac audirvana software - schiit eitr - yaqin 13s tube amp - Dali opticon 1
Mac  audiravana software - schiit eitr - beyerdynamic a2 - beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones


----------



## miketlse

Lodwales81 said:


> Hello all, purchased my qutest around 2 weeks ago replacing my schiit bitfrost which was connected to a eitr. My honest opinion is that the qutest isn't a massive upgrade but a subtle one . Just a few questions if anybody can help, I can't tell any difference when I change the filters so I just leave it on the white led. Also should I go USB from my mac into qutest or is my schiit eitr a better USB interface. I have tried switching between the two but not difference the eitr is limited to 24 bit 192 with spdif output.
> 
> My setups
> Mac audirvana software - schiit eitr - yaqin 13s tube amp - Dali opticon 1
> Mac  audiravana software - schiit eitr - beyerdynamic a2 - beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones


24 bit 192 with spdif output is the maximum allowed by the SPDIF standard, so no AV equipment (includes dacs) will be able to exceed it.
I think Rob Watts used the same filters, that he developed for the Hugo 2 https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.831345/page-297#post-13546609
The effect of the filters can appear very subtle, and difficult to detect for RBCD music. I use mainly RBCD files, and like some other posters I think the white filter makes the edges on piano notes sharper, but I have given up trying to detect any difference between the other filters.
As Rob suggests, the filters are more detectable with HiRes files.


----------



## x RELIC x

miketlse said:


> 24 bit 192 with spdif output is the maximum allowed by the SPDIF standard, so no AV equipment (includes dacs) will be able to exceed it.



Actually, this applies to optical S/PDiF and not coaxial S/PDiF which has a max of 24/384. Just thought it should be clarified.


----------



## Lodwales81

Regarding bit rates I find even if I play a dsd file through audiravana its sounds quiet and lifeless, in fact all my 24 bit high res music does not sound as good as just playing music in the tidal app which is 16bit.


----------



## blueninjasix

Lodwales81 said:


> Hello all, purchased my qutest around 2 weeks ago replacing my schiit bitfrost which was connected to a eitr. My honest opinion is that the qutest isn't a massive upgrade but a subtle one . Just a few questions if anybody can help, I can't tell any difference when I change the filters so I just leave it on the white led. Also should I go USB from my mac into qutest or is my schiit eitr a better USB interface. I have tried switching between the two but not difference the eitr is limited to 24 bit 192 with spdif output.
> 
> My setups
> Mac audirvana software - schiit eitr - yaqin 13s tube amp - Dali opticon 1
> Mac  audiravana software - schiit eitr - beyerdynamic a2 - beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones


I used the Eitr with my Mojo and noticed a massive improvement. The sound seemed more refined and delicate and I found myself raising the volume. Like you I've just got Qutest and started with usb direct. I find the sound to be very "incisive". 
For the first time today, I tried the Eitr with Qutest but I really can't detect any improvement at all compared with usb direct. The Eitr brought Galvanic Isolation to Mojo but Qutest has already got it on the usb input so maybe my experience shouldn't be a surprise. I'll leave it in place for another day to let the Eitr warm up and settle down but I suspect it'll be redundant by the end of the week!


----------



## jayz

Lodwales81 said:


> Hello all, purchased my qutest around 2 weeks ago replacing my schiit bitfrost which was connected to a eitr. My honest opinion is that the qutest isn't a massive upgrade but a subtle one . Just a few questions if anybody can help, I can't tell any difference when I change the filters so I just leave it on the white led. Also should I go USB from my mac into qutest or is my schiit eitr a better USB interface. I have tried switching between the two but not difference the eitr is limited to 24 bit 192 with spdif output.
> 
> My setups
> Mac audirvana software - schiit eitr - yaqin 13s tube amp - Dali opticon 1
> Mac  audiravana software - schiit eitr - beyerdynamic a2 - beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones



Not quite what you asked for but I suggest you find someone who can lend a dedicated digital player and connect direct to qutest via coax or optical. I realise you are only interested in the performance difference between the DACs and in the past I have also tried to compare components this way but with the Qutest, it is all about discovering and eliminating the bottlenecks in the rest of the system.


----------



## jwbrent

Regarding the filters, I’m a little surprised that the Mojo-like filters are not differentiated with unique colors—they’re both red on my Qutest. Nevertheless, I find myself going back and forth between the white and green filter depending on the recording.


----------



## gordec

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Before you go out and spend more money on gear you may want to consider the following:
> a) PCs in general and usb ports in particular can be particularly noisy. However, there are some things that can help.  You may want to mess around with your port assignments on device manager to see if you can tell if "loud" devices like mice and keyboards and other peripherals are running off the same one as your audio.  Additionally, programs like fidelizer can reduce background activities which may help.  There is a free version without all the bells and whistles.   http://www.fidelizer-audio.com/ Also, I am a long time supporter of JRiver, but it is more susceptible to background noise than some programs in my experience.  HQPlayer is very quiet, and again you can run a trial version without dropping any cash. https://www.signalyst.com/consumer.html   Not nearly as sexy or user friendly as JRiver but the sound and silence is better I think.   Finally, is your PC sharing the same power source with your audio?  Often with PC's the power sharing of the PC, Audio, peripherals, etc can create noise. At a minimum, I may try plugging the DAC into a different wall socket than that running my PC power strip to see if that makes a change. Some people have had a lot of success with the IFi's AC purifier.  If you are in the states you could order it on amazon risk free, try it, and if it has no effect, return it.  https://www.amazon.com/IFI-iPurifier-Mains-Audio-Eliminator/dp/B07835J8XF  One last comment, I wouldn't rule out the effect of something like Micro USB 3.0 or the ISO Regen, or different USB cables that isolate the data and the power signals for that matter.  My bet is that your data is coming from the PC just fine, its just coming with a lot of crap too.  You have to strip that crap away.   Often, this is trial and error.  Also, you will get to the point of diminishing returns on investment.  Good luck.



I unplugged everything associated with the USB 2.0 ports except the Qutest. This seems to work really well. Three days now, and only had 1 episode of audio stutter. I'm getting clear and natural sound. I'm thinking about buying a standalone PCIE USB card. I'm not sure if that will squeeze out the last bit of performance. I also looked at the SoTM and JCAT USB cards, but just can't make myself pay $300 + for a USB card. 

Qutest-> MHA100 -> Susvara sounds just sublime.


----------



## rhern213

gordec said:


> I unplugged everything associated with the USB 2.0 ports except the Qutest. This seems to work really well. Three days now, and only had 1 episode of audio stutter. I'm getting clear and natural sound. I'm thinking about buying a standalone PCIE USB card. I'm not sure if that will squeeze out the last bit of performance. I also looked at the SoTM and JCAT USB cards, but just can't make myself pay $300 + for a USB card.
> 
> Qutest-> MHA100 -> Susvara sounds just sublime.



Do you have to play it off a computer? You wouldn't consider a dedicated music server/NAS? I got an Auralic Mini for $400, put in an internal SSD and eliminated all worries about interference or interruptions, and can control it wirelessly. It's as clean sounding as can be and you don't have to worry about the restraints of a wired computer.


----------



## gordec

rhern213 said:


> Do you have to play it off a computer? You wouldn't consider a dedicated music server/NAS? I got an Auralic Mini for $400, put in an internal SSD and eliminated all worries about interference or interruptions, and can control it wirelessly. It's as clean sounding as can be and you don't have to worry about the restraints of a wired computer.



Very good point. I should do that.


----------



## hbmorrison

Has anybody tried the Qutest with an Android phone as a source?


----------



## RiseFall123

Hi everybody,

questions:

1) how is the qutest paired with an Android TV (optical) and to an iPhone 8?

2) will the qutest have a warmer presentation as the mojo? I look for a warm sound signature.


----------



## dawktah2

hannahjherself said:


> Has anybody tried the Qutest with an Android phone as a source?



Yes only temporarily though. I was trying to figure out how to get DSD to play out of my Synology NAS when it wasn't. It played out of my Galaxy S6. Used USB audio Player PRO.

What did you want to know?


----------



## hbmorrison

dawktah2 said:


> Yes only temporarily though. I was trying to figure out how to get DSD to play out of my Synology NAS when it wasn't. It played out of my Galaxy S6. Used USB audio Player PRO.
> 
> What did you want to know?



I am currently streaming Qobuz and downloaded audio using USB Audio Player PRO from my Samsung Galaxy S9 to a Modi 2 Multibit and then into my Oppo HA-1. I find this gives me stable, glitch free audio. However, if I connect my S9 directly to the HA-1 I get glitches and dropouts, so there must be some USB implementation differences or driver differences between the two DACs.

So basically I am a bit nervous about grabbing the Qutest in case its USB implementation will also be flaky.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jul 21, 2018)

hannahjherself said:


> I am currently streaming Qobuz and downloaded audio using USB Audio Player PRO from my Samsung Galaxy S9 to a Modi 2 Multibit and then into my Oppo HA-1. I find this gives me stable, glitch free audio. However, if I connect my S9 directly to the HA-1 I get glitches and dropouts, so there must be some USB implementation differences or driver differences between the two DACs.
> 
> So basically I am a bit nervous about grabbing the Qutest in case its USB implementation will also be flaky.



What setting do you have it on "bit perfect?" Don't put it on When ever possible.  I have set to on. Make sure "upsample is off!"  Make sure force 16-bit is off. Also are files on the phone or a NAS?  I get glitching when I play from network drive sometimes.


----------



## hbmorrison

dawktah2 said:


> What setting do you have it on "bit perfect?" Don't put it on When ever possible.  I have set to on. Make sure "upsample is off!"  Make sure force 16-bit is off. Also are files on the phone or a NAS?  I get glitching when I play from network drive sometimes.



Yeah I have bit perfect on and upsampling off. As I said it works great with the Modi 2 Multibit.

My next DAC upgrade will probably be to the Qutest so it would be good to hear other peoples experiences with it using an Android phone as a source.


----------



## nickosiris

gordec said:


> Very good point. I should do that.



imho MOST people should do that.


----------



## gordec

nickosiris said:


> imho MOST people should do that.



Some people feel you can actually do more upgrades via PC vs if you get a server, future upgrades are limited. I'm looking into a Room NUC setup.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jul 21, 2018)

gordec said:


> Some people feel you can actually do more upgrades via PC vs if you get a server, future upgrades are limited. I'm looking into a Room NUC setup.



I'm not sure what that means?  PC and a Server are essentially the same thing. I'm running a Synology DS416play.  Break it open its a PC...


----------



## peter1480

gordec said:


> Some people feel you can actually do more upgrades via PC vs if you get a server, future upgrades are limited. I'm looking into a Room NUC setup.





dawktah2 said:


> I'm not sure what that means?  PC and a Server are essentially the same thing. I'm running a Synology DS416play.  Break it open its a PC...



Roon will run on Qunap and Synology, best on an SSD for speed.


----------



## dawktah2

peter1480 said:


> Roon will run on Qunap and Synology, best on an SSD for speed.



I'm going to answer without looking it up but I thought nowadays access speed is faster than USB or LAN even with a HDD, for just straight file transfer, could be wrong.


----------



## gordec

dawktah2 said:


> I'm not sure what that means?  PC and a Server are essentially the same thing. I'm running a Synology DS416play.  Break it open its a PC...



I'm talking about getting something like an Auralic mini, Roon Nucleus, etc aftermarket all in one server vs just do as much as you can to your desktop to clean up the audio. I just put in the PPA PCIE usb card and powering the card using ifi iPower instead of motherboard powersupply. This actually is making a clear audible improvement.


----------



## jayz

Hugo TT form factor M Scaler has been announced by Chord Electronics. First and foremost, congratulations to Rob and Chord electronics for pushing the boundaries.

And looking forward to the budget version for Qutest. The future sounds very promising for digital audio.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^And must be awesome!Looking forward for a cheaper version,too!


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> ^And must be awesome!Looking forward for a cheaper version,too!


I think you will be disappointed. Chord released the Hugo family MScaler, which includes qutest, so I doubt that they will release a separate one just for qutest.


----------



## Zzt231gr

miketlse said:


> I think you will be disappointed. Chord released the Hugo family MScaler, which includes qutest, so I doubt that they will release a separate one just for qutest.


Do you ever stop wishing,my friend?


----------



## blueninjasix

Zzt231gr said:


> Do you ever stop wishing,my friend?


Qutest is a stripped back, cheaper version of Hugo² so you never know!


----------



## Joe-Siow

blueninjasix said:


> Qutest is a stripped back, cheaper version of Hugo² so you never know!



One can always look forward to a lower end model, but I'm not too optimistic. Blu2 and Hugo M Scaler sounds about right for the range, otherwise it'll just end up cannibalizing sales


----------



## jayz (Jul 23, 2018)

miketlse said:


> I think you will be disappointed. Chord released the Hugo family MScaler, which includes qutest, so I doubt that they will release a separate one just for qutest.



Well firstly. I don't expect a budget scaler immediately but if you think about it, there is the BluMK2 and Dave - both the same form factor and roughly same price bracket. Then Hugo TT2 DAC and now Hugo MScaler both in the 3 - 4k GBP price bracket and both the same form factor as well. Therefore it is not entirely unfair to expect a Scaler for Qutest in a similar form factor and price bracket but I can imagine there will be challenges both technical and commercial to make it happen. I am sure they will have thought long and hard about Qutest cannibalising sales of Hugo TT2.


----------



## soares

Not sure if there will be a budget


miketlse said:


> I think you will be disappointed. Chord released the Hugo family MScaler, which includes qutest, so I doubt that they will release a separate one just for qutest.


I also doubt that an MScaler for the Qutest will ever be released certainly for marketing reasons.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^I completely agree!


----------



## Zzt231gr

soares said:


> Not sure if there will be a budget
> 
> I also doubt that an MScaler for the Qutest will ever be released certainly for marketing reasons.


I think otherwise.Think of the video inputs which are worthless for an audiophile.


----------



## blueninjasix

There is a large gap in the price of Qutest compared to TT2. As someone who "only" spent £1,200 on Qutest, I can't envisage spending £3,495 on HMS. I hope that the technology will eventually trickle down to the Qutest level and I know Chord will be listening to these pleas and make it sooner rather than later.


----------



## jwbrent

miketlse said:


> I think you will be disappointed. Chord released the Hugo family MScaler, which includes qutest, so I doubt that they will release a separate one just for qutest.



I’d agree with you here, but the differing form factors suggest that maybe a version in the same chassis size (if that’s possible) will be released at some point. I suppose there could be other economies as well to allow for a more affordable price.

This is a question for @Rob Watts ...


----------



## jwbrent

One other thing, can someone confirm that the last two filter options are both red like mine? I don’t understand why Chord would use the same color for two different filters.


----------



## jwbrent

Zzt231gr said:


> I think otherwise.Think of the video inputs which are worthless for an audiophile.



I don’t want any of my audio gear to have “Video” labeling on it. Sacrilege!


----------



## dawktah2

jwbrent said:


> One other thing, can someone confirm that the last two filter options are both red like mine? I don’t understand why Chord would use the same color for two different filters.



White, Green, Orange and Red


----------



## jwbrent

dawktah2 said:


> White, Green, Orange and Red



Thank you. Because my Qutest has sunlight shining on it, the orange and red looked the same to my aging eyes. Problem solved!


----------



## dawktah2

jwbrent said:


> Thank you. Because my Qutest has sunlight shining on it, the orange and red looked the same to my aging eyes. Problem solved!



No prob!


----------



## jayz (Jul 24, 2018)

I look forward to reviews of the MScaler connected to TT2 in the coming days - all good stuff.

The first person to review MScaler connected to Qutest wins a medal


----------



## Rhinomyte76

Question regarding MScaler and its potential benefit to the Qutest.

Wondering whether this actually has a positive effect.  Maybe its too early to know or maybe I'm just ignorant of any studies out there.  So...software such as HQPlayer can upscale the digital signal  (Khz) of music files.  However, reading on some threads it sounds like this does not necessarily have a positive effect on the sound.  Does the M Scaler operate similarly or is it something different that provides a further improvement beyond software such as HQPlayer?

Additionally, if a redbook CD was recorded in analog and transferred to CD at 16 44.1 Khz, how is an upscaler going to create further clarity when we can't change the quality of the source?  I'm not trying to cast doubt on the product, I just don't understand how it may improve the sounds of my qutest.  Any input is appreciated. Thank you.


----------



## AlexB73 (Jul 25, 2018)

It is an interesting question.
Audirvana also does realtime upsampling with a half of million taps.
But, it looks impossible to do it on not dedicated PC or MAC hardware.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/upsampling-dac-or-audirvarna-plus.833532/


----------



## jwbrent (Jul 25, 2018)

jayz said:


> I look forward to reviews of the MScaler connected to TT2 in the coming days - all good stuff.
> 
> The first person to review MScaler connected to Qutest wins a medal



I wonder how many Qutest owners are going to spend 5K for the M Scaler. TT owners, I’m sure will be abundant, but not so much for those who spent under 2K for a DAC. Totally different market. We’ll see ...


----------



## jwbrent

AlexB73 said:


> It is an interesting question.
> Audirvana also does realtime upsampling with a half of million taps.
> But, it looks impossible to do it on not dedicated PC or MAC hardware.
> 
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/upsampling-dac-or-audirvarna-plus.833532/



Did not realize this. I use Audirvana+ with my MacBook.


----------



## jayz

jwbrent said:


> I wonder how many Qutest owners are going to spend 5K for the M Scaler. TT owners, I’m sure will be abundant, but not so much for those who spent under 2K for a DAC. Totally different market. We’ll see ...



I agree it is a different market.

And I intend to wait till a cheaper MScaler becomes available but meantime, would be good to know in what ways my Qutest's performance can improve - hopes and dreams really, nothing more. It makes waiting a little less painful.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jul 25, 2018)

jwbrent said:


> I wonder how many Qutest owners are going to spend 5K for the M Scaler. TT owners, I’m sure will be abundant, but not so much for those who spent under 2K for a DAC. Totally different market. We’ll see ...



Actually I would have.  I had planned on the WA33 but I have reconsidered.  I need a headphone amp but because I need a remote and the TT 2 is coming out I am going to sell/trade Qutest for TT 2. The only thing that could change this is I happen to find a tube/valve headphone amp with a remote.


----------



## musicman59

dawktah2 said:


> Actually I would have.  I had planned on the WA33 but I have reconsidered.  I need a headphone amp but because I need a remote and the TT 2 is coming out I am going to sell/trade Qutest for TT 2. The only thing that could change this is I happen to find a tube/valve headphone amp with a remote.


Check out the PrimaLuna Dialogue Premium HP. It is an integrated amplifier that has headphones output running through the same circuits as the speaker outputs. It has Ultra-Linear and Triode mode outputs that can be change on the fly and it has a remote control.
I upgraded the 12AU7 to NOS Mullard and the EL34 to NOS Simmens. It really sounds very good and is powerful.


----------



## azabu

Rhinomyte76 said:


> Question regarding MScaler and its potential benefit to the Qutest.
> 
> Wondering whether this actually has a positive effect.  Maybe its too early to know or maybe I'm just ignorant of any studies out there.  So...software such as HQPlayer can upscale the digital signal  (Khz) of music files.  However, reading on some threads it sounds like this does not necessarily have a positive effect on the sound.  Does the M Scaler operate similarly or is it something different that provides a further improvement beyond software such as HQPlayer?
> 
> Additionally, if a redbook CD was recorded in analog and transferred to CD at 16 44.1 Khz, how is an upscaler going to create further clarity when we can't change the quality of the source?  I'm not trying to cast doubt on the product, I just don't understand how it may improve the sounds of my qutest.  Any input is appreciated. Thank you.



HQPlayer is brilliant, it just takes processing power for DSD. PCM shouldn't be an issue, my Macbook's CPU runs at 10%.


----------



## Sage Encore (Jul 26, 2018)

OctavianH said:


> Guys, what RCA cables are you using for Qutest connection to the amp? I tried here Chord C-Line 0.5m:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am using Tara labs Prism cables, bought like 20-22 years ago. They are directional. Still sound as good as new. Really brilliant cables.


----------



## dawktah2 (Jul 26, 2018)

musicman59 said:


> Check out the PrimaLuna Dialogue Premium HP. It is an integrated amplifier that has headphones output running through the same circuits as the speaker outputs. It has Ultra-Linear and Triode mode outputs that can be change on the fly and it has a remote control.
> I upgraded the 12AU7 to NOS Mullard and the EL34 to NOS Simmens. It really sounds very good and is powerful.



Oh, thank you so much!  I am reading up on it now! Is there a thread for it on Head-Fi?


----------



## Frojo

Having spent an hour or so listening this afternoon ,I have just walked past my system, and noticed my Qutest with all lights flashing.
Disconnecting the power supply and re-connecting has reset it, but i cannot find any reference to why it has happened- any ideas or info gratefully received.


----------



## STR-1

Frojo said:


> Having spent an hour or so listening this afternoon ,I have just walked past my system, and noticed my Qutest with all lights flashing.
> Disconnecting the power supply and re-connecting has reset it, but i cannot find any reference to why it has happened- any ideas or info gratefully received.


In London we had some thunder storms early evening.  If you’ve had the same, maybe a brief interuption to the electricity supply?


----------



## Frojo

Thanks STR-1, no thunderstorms as yet (expecting rain later) 
I hadn't noticed any supply glitches


----------



## Zzt231gr

Frojo said:


> Thanks STR-1, no thunderstorms as yet (expecting rain later)
> I hadn't noticed any supply glitches


Maybe you should contact Chord about possible malfunctioning unit?


----------



## Frojo

Zzt231gr said:


> Maybe you should contact Chord about possible malfunctioning unit?


Thanks Zz
I am trying to get an insight into where or what the problem might be, prior to shipping the whole unit back to Chord if necessary.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Maybe Mr. Rob could chime in for an express help...


----------



## Rob Watts

Frojo said:


> Having spent an hour or so listening this afternoon ,I have just walked past my system, and noticed my Qutest with all lights flashing.
> Disconnecting the power supply and re-connecting has reset it, but i cannot find any reference to why it has happened- any ideas or info gratefully received.



Flashing lights indicates failure of authorisation - the device is authorised at power-up by checking the FPGA unique DNA with a unique programmed 512 bit encryption key. I suspect what has happened is that power has been interrupted, and its either corrupted the FPGA, or the boot sequence was incorrect with a poor internal reset due to the power going off/coming back on. I have never seen this before, but for sure don't worry about it - disconnecting power and re-applying will ensure a correct booting up.



Zzt231gr said:


> Maybe Mr. Rob could chime in for an express help...



No need, the Chord support team are very good - I have often seen them bending over backwards to help. But in this instance there is nothing wrong...


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^You are the man!


----------



## jwbrent

Now that I have plenty of run-in time on my Qutest, one area of note is it’s bass performance. I’m completely surprised how much better my Raidho XT-1s sound reproducing low frequencies.

Has anyone else found this to be true in their experience?

I’ve mentioned this before, but the overall sound of the Qutest is grain free, just a liquid presentation of the upper registers using the white filter. In contrast, when I owned the Hugo, I found its sound to be bright, overbearingly so at times, with a granular reproduction of the trebles.

I’m a very happy Qutest owner, and strongly recommend it to others looking for a high capability DAC under 2K.


----------



## dawktah2

jwbrent said:


> Now that I have plenty of run-in time on my Qutest, one area of note is it’s bass performance. I’m completely surprised how much better my Raidho XT-1s sound reproducing low frequencies.
> 
> Has anyone else found this to be true in their experience?
> 
> ...



Yes, I have noticed the lower end seems extended.  Sounds deeper and compared to previous devices.


----------



## rhern213 (Jul 28, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> No need, the Chord support team are very good - I have often seen them bending over backwards to help. But in this instance there is nothing wrong...



Hi Rob, hoping to get some insight from you, on the Qutest is there anything inherent in the design of the output ports between USB/COAX/Optical that should make either one a more real natural sounding option?

Reason I'm asking is I can hear a difference between using each of the outputs, to me the Optical sounds the smoothest and softest, USB in between the 3, and COAX the brightest/impactfull of all.

I can't make up my mind on which I prefer, it differs with certain tracks but I'm obviously not going to be switching ports all the time. So I was hoping to find out if there's a technical reason for one of the ports to reproduce a more realistic sound than the others?

Thanks!


----------



## Zzt231gr

jwbrent said:


> Now that I have plenty of run-in time on my Qutest, one area of note is it’s bass performance. I’m completely surprised how much better my Raidho XT-1s sound reproducing low frequencies.
> 
> Has anyone else found this to be true in their experience?
> 
> ...





dawktah2 said:


> Yes, I have noticed the lower end seems extended.  Sounds deeper and compared to previous devices.


I haven't noticed it to be more extended but it is more free flowing and analytical.It was obvious from the first listening,especially with double bass chords!


----------



## Rob Watts

rhern213 said:


> Hi Rob, hoping to get some insight from you, on the Qutest is there anything inherent in the design of the output ports between USB/COAX/Optical that should make either one a more real natural sounding option?
> 
> Reason I'm asking is I can hear a difference between using each of the outputs, to me the Optical sounds the smoothest and softest, USB in between the 3, and COAX the brightest/impactfull of all.
> 
> ...



On Hugo 2 optical sounds the same as USB - and this is via headphones, so no ground loop from the source, and hence no ground currents. It changes as soon as you ground the connection, which normally happens with Qutest, as you will connect an amp on the outputs. Now to reduce the ground currents (RF noise into the ground plane of the DAC) I use galvanic isolation and RF filters - but it's not possible to totally eliminate the issue. If you use a low power, simple source, then USB sounds the same as optical (particularly with battery powered sources), so use the optical as your benchmark. To do the listening tests correctly you need to disconnect all other sources. Coax has no galvanic isolation, and direct coupling to the grounds, so will always be the brighter sounding input.

The reason it sounds brighter is RF noise when interfering with analogue creates more noise floor modulation, which makes it sound brighter.


----------



## Zzt231gr

So,would you suggest connecting my cd transport through optical and not coaxial?


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> Yes!


Can you please tell me what difference to expect to hear between those two inputs,to make a comparison listening test?


----------



## Rob Watts

Optical is warmer and smoother, due to the complete galvanic isolation. USB comes close, sometimes identical to optical. But Coax I can't put RF filtering in without degrading lock abilities.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> Optical is warmer and smoother, due to the complete galvanic isolation. USB comes close, sometimes identical to optical. But Coax I can't put RF filtering in without degrading lock abilities.


So,you are saying that CD transports transfer noise through coax output which degrades the digital signal,hence optical is as real sounding as possible?


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes. The only way SQ can be impaired is via RF noise connected via the ground, and optical does not suffer from this problem. Source jitter is not an issue with my DACs.


----------



## Lodwales81

I was under the impression that optical was the last resort for audio connection, at the moment I run a USB from my mac pro to my qutest dac but changing to optical could bring an improvement?


----------



## rhern213 (Jul 29, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> On Hugo 2 optical sounds the same as USB - and this is via headphones, so no ground loop from the source, and hence no ground currents. It changes as soon as you ground the connection, which normally happens with Qutest, as you will connect an amp on the outputs. Now to reduce the ground currents (RF noise into the ground plane of the DAC) I use galvanic isolation and RF filters - but it's not possible to totally eliminate the issue. If you use a low power, simple source, then USB sounds the same as optical (particularly with battery powered sources), so use the optical as your benchmark. To do the listening tests correctly you need to disconnect all other sources. Coax has no galvanic isolation, and direct coupling to the grounds, so will always be the brighter sounding input.
> 
> The reason it sounds brighter is RF noise when interfering with analogue creates more noise floor modulation, which makes it sound brighter.



Thanks for the explanation Rob! I didn't realize the optical port was also isolated, I thought it was only the USB. Was this done in the Qutest's optical port by design, or is it simply the technology of optical connections themselves that are free from ground noise?

My source is an Auralic Mini with an internal SSD, so I think I can classify it as simple. My Qutest is powered by a battery pack, but the Auralic is just through the standard supplied wall-wart. I guess there's also the question of whether the Auralic mini outputs a cleaner signal through USB or Optical.


----------



## Zzt231gr

But Rob,just to be clear-are you sure that every CD transport outputs noise through coaxial output?


----------



## Rob Watts

rhern213 said:


> Thanks for the explanation Rob! I didn't realize the optical port was also isolated, I thought it was only the USB. Was this done in the Qutest's optical port by design, or is it simply the technology of optical connections themselves that are free from ground noise?
> 
> My source is an Auralic Mini with an internal SSD, so I think I can classify it as simple. My Qutest is powered by a battery pack, but the Auralic is just through the standard supplied wall-wart. I guess there's also the question of whether the Auralic mini outputs a cleaner signal through USB or Optical.



Yes optical data is transmitted through light only, so no electrical connection at all. It's the perfect galvanic isolation, as the coupling capacitance is almost zero.



Zzt231gr said:


> But Rob,just to be clear-are you sure that every CD transport outputs noise through coaxial output?



Yes, all electrical connections from a digital source will have RF noise on the ground. Even if it is galvanically isolated, there is still a coupling capacitance, which degrades the isolation at higher frequencies (particularly in the GHz range).


----------



## Zzt231gr

kovacs said:


> Hey man, I just compared the Optical vs. the RCA output from the Cambridge CXC transport, both sound good, but I prefer the RCA to BNC cable over the optical connection, seems to sound fuller and has a better soundstage. Not sure how much is down to the cables ( Oehlbach optical cable and Ghent Audio RCA to BNC 75 Ohm cable ) and how much is the connection type, but I think the RCA to BNC cable sounds better. Just my 2 cents... I don’t think you can go wrong with the Belden.


Our fellow member had the exact opposite opinion on the sound between those inputs.Can you explain that?


----------



## Rob Watts

It depends what he means by the terms "fuller" and "better soundstage".

If fuller means warmer, richer and smoother, then no that doesn't make sense to me. But if fuller is a brighter sound, then it's just the case of thinking the extra noise floor modulation is more transparency - it can be impossible to tell the difference.

Coax can have worse depth, and the converse of this is the perception of more width - flat and wide, against less width but much deeper soundstage with better layering.


----------



## sasaki99

I have both H2 and Qutest, the Qutest just arrived a week ago because I just quit the headphone world and go into hifi 2CH. The H2 sound more natural to me, more organic while the Qutest sounds bright. I also prepared an AQ diamond USB cable for the Qutest. When pairing I found the qutest is just too bright, really bright, thought it would sound the same as H2.

Sooo, what’s your opinion about H2 and Dave. I prefer neutral sound, not the bright sound, if I say the Qutest is bright, what you would say about the Dave.

Thanks!


----------



## sasaki99

I have both H2 and Qutest, the Qutest just arrived a week ago because I just quit the headphone world and go into hifi 2CH. The H2 sound more natural to me, more organic while the Qutest sounds bright. I also prepared an AQ diamond USB cable for the Qutest. When pairing I found the qutest is just too bright, really bright, thought it would sound the same as H2.

Sooo, what’s your opinion about H2 and Dave. I prefer neutral sound, not the bright sound, if I say the Qutest is bright, what you would say about the Dave.

Thanks!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> It depends what he means by the terms "fuller" and "better soundstage".
> 
> If fuller means warmer, richer and smoother, then no that doesn't make sense to me. But if fuller is a brighter sound, then it's just the case of thinking the extra noise floor modulation is more transparency - it can be impossible to tell the difference.
> 
> Coax can have worse depth, and the converse of this is the perception of more width - flat and wide, against less width but much deeper soundstage with better layering.


Very helpful comment.I must find the time tonight to test it myself.


----------



## kovacs (Jul 30, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> It depends what he means by the terms "fuller" and "better soundstage".
> 
> If fuller means warmer, richer and smoother, then no that doesn't make sense to me. But if fuller is a brighter sound, then it's just the case of thinking the extra noise floor modulation is more transparency - it can be impossible to tell the difference.
> 
> Coax can have worse depth, and the converse of this is the perception of more width - flat and wide, against less width but much deeper soundstage with better layering.



It's been a while since I did this test, but from what I remember it did really sound fuller and the soundstage did seem deeper ( I don't really pay much attention to soundstage width because it's always pretty poor in my room even with a lot of acoustic treatment ). I could redo the test, but I don't think you can entirely predict which will sound better based on the supposed technical superiority of optical, other factors than just RFI are at play here. The electrical signal has to be converted to an optical signal, send through a pretty basic optical cable and back to an electrical one. I find it hard to believe that all this can be done without loss of information or introducing it's own set of problems. That said I will try the optical connection again and specifically listen to the things you describe.


----------



## Zzt231gr

kovacs said:


> It's been a while since I did this test, but from what I remember it did really sound fuller and the soundstage did seem deeper ( I don't really pay much attention to soundstage width because it's always pretty poor in my room even with a lot of accoustic treatment ). I could redo the test, but I don't think you can entirely predict which will sound better based on the supposed technical superiority of optical, other factors than just RFI are at play here. The electrical signal has to be converted to an optical signal, send through a pretty basic optical cable and back to an electrical one. I find it hard to believe that all this can be done without loss of information or introducing it's own set of problems. That said I will try the optical connection again and specifically listen to the things you describe.


You do that-I will try to when I find the time.

Treating with broadband absorption your side first reflection points for both speakers will give all the width in the world.I frequently hear the instruments outside of the speakers precisely-if the rec allows.


----------



## kovacs

Zzt231gr said:


> You do that-I will try to when I find the time.
> 
> Treating with broadband absorption your side first reflection points for both speakers will give all the width in the world.I frequently hear the instruments outside of the speakers precisely-if the rec allows.



Believe me I've tried everything to recreate the soundstage I had in my previous room, I've got a big diffuser ( https://www.thomann.de/be/the_takustik_sc_diffusor.htm ), some absorbers and a big rug. I've even completely rearranged the furniture, it's not exactly pretty but at least now it sounds pretty decent. Soundstage depth is good but I can't get the speakers to completely disappear as much as I want, but right now this is as good as it gets without placing more diffusers in the middle of the room.


----------



## Zzt231gr

kovacs said:


> Believe me I've tried everything to recreate the soundstage I had in my previous room, I've got a big diffuser ( https://www.thomann.de/be/the_takustik_sc_diffusor.htm ), some absorbers and a big rug. I've even completely rearranged the furniture, it's not exactly pretty but at least now it sounds pretty decent. Soundstage depth is good but I can't get the speakers to completely disappear as much as I want, but right now this is as good as it gets without placing more diffusers in the middle of the room.


Can you post some pictures of your space?Diffusers don't work well below 2 meters distance.Don't want to insult,but it must be something wrong with your treatment placement.In my room,everyone praises my holographic imaging and the disappearance of the speakers!


----------



## jayz

Rob Watts said:


> It depends what he means by the terms "fuller" and "better soundstage".
> 
> If fuller means warmer, richer and smoother, then no that doesn't make sense to me. But if fuller is a brighter sound, then it's just the case of thinking the extra noise floor modulation is more transparency - it can be impossible to tell the difference.
> 
> Coax can have worse depth, and the converse of this is the perception of more width - flat and wide, against less width but much deeper soundstage with better layering.




That seem to suggest that if we are interested in maximum depth of perception and layering, for PCM up to 192/24, there is no advantage whatsoever in using Coax instead of Optical. 

If that is the case, I should go back to Optical and see. Would be good to know.


----------



## Lodwales81

So optical is a better option than USB even though optical does not handle anything. Above 24/176 




jayz said:


> That seem to suggest that if we are interested in maximum depth of perception and layering, for PCM up to 192/24, there is no advantage whatsoever in using Coax instead of Optical.
> 
> If that is the case, I should go back to Optical and see. Would be good to know.


----------



## AlexB73

I compared optical (QED Reference) to coaxial (Belkin Professional) with both 2Qute and Qutest.
Coaxial always sounds more deep, reach in tone and natural. Optical sounds clinical and artificial in comparison.


----------



## maxh22

AlexB73 said:


> I compared optical (QED Reference) to coaxial (Belkin Professional) with both 2Qute and Qutest.
> Coaxial always sounds more deep, reach in tone and natural. Optical sounds clinical and artificial in comparison.



Two different brands, some optical cables can sound more clinical compared to others.

Try Kabeldirekt optical cables they sound very smooth with every dac I’ve tried.


----------



## jayz

jayz said:


> That seem to suggest that if we are interested in maximum depth of perception and layering, for PCM up to 192/24, there is no advantage whatsoever in using Coax instead of Optical.
> 
> If that is the case, I should go back to Optical and see. Would be good to know.




It occurred to me that the last time I tried to compare, I had done something fundamentally wrong. So last night I spent some time from a clean sheet, comparing coax vs optical performance in my system. Instruments do sound more palpable with optical. The soundstage is also  different - I have to spend a few more days to gauge details.

The mistake I had done earlier was to leave the coax connected at both ends while listening to optical cable. This time I made sure to disconnect and move it out of the way.


----------



## peter1480

maxh22 said:


> Two different brands, some optical cables can sound more clinical compared to others.
> 
> Try Kabeldirekt optical cables they sound very smooth with every dac I’ve tried.



SKW, Audioquest, Wireworld and Van den Hul optical cables all sound very smooth and analog.


----------



## Zzt231gr

jayz said:


> It occurred to me that the last time I tried to compare, I had done something fundamentally wrong. So last night I spent some time from a clean sheet, comparing coax vs optical performance in my system. Instruments do sound more palpable with optical. The soundstage is also  different - I have to spend a few more days to gauge details.
> 
> The mistake I had done earlier was to leave the coax connected at both ends while listening to optical cable. This time I made sure to disconnect and move it out of the way.


I may have the time to make a similar test tomorrow.

There is crosstalk between different inputs on Qutest-you better do!


----------



## jayz

@Zzt231gr would be good to know your findings.

The reason I think it is important to remove the coax completely when evaluating optical is because coax is not galvanically isolated as Rob has pointed out so that leaves a channel open for common mode noise to get in. Presumably, the input selector will only switch the centre conductor of coax but the outer screen remains always connected.


----------



## Zzt231gr

jayz said:


> @Zzt231gr would be good to know your findings.
> 
> The reason I think it is important to remove the coax completely when evaluating optical is because coax is not galvanically isolated as Rob has pointed out so that leaves a channel open for common mode noise to get in. Presumably, the input selector will only switch the centre conductor of coax but the outer screen remains always connected.


If that is the case,you are totally correct.


----------



## latuda

Question for Rob Watts...and my first post 

I own the Qutest and love it. 

Are the dual BNC coax inputs on the Qutest galvanically isolated? I ask because I read on another forum that the dual BNC coax outputs on the new M Scaler are galvanically isolated.

I've been using the optical output from my Rega Apollo CDP transport into the optical input on my Qutest. 

But I'm wondering if Rob says the BNC inputs on the Qutest are also galvanically isolated if that's perhaps a better connection from the Rega to achieve the best SQ?

Thanks!


----------



## flacre (Aug 2, 2018)

I think this might help:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-122#post-14389137

Plus the following couple of posts.


----------



## ChasingDopamine

Considering getting this as a DAC for my speaker system. Has anyone had any issues with the USB charging or data ports? I ask as the mojo's ports are known to have issues.

Am I correct to believe the warranty is 3 years for parts and labour? Would repairs be possible after warranty (at a fee)?


----------



## miketlse

ChasingDopamine said:


> Considering getting this as a DAC for my speaker system. Has anyone had any issues with the USB charging or data ports? I ask as the mojo's ports are known to have issues.
> 
> Am I correct to believe the warranty is 3 years for parts and labour? Would repairs be possible after warranty (at a fee)?


I think it is an exaggeration to say that the Mojo has issues with its USB sockets. There have been maybe 5 reports of issues on head-fi, from 50,000+ units sold.
The cases where sockets have broken off the circuit board, have usually occurred because the mojo was put in a rucksack (or similar) with a plug or adapter left in the socket. As the mojo moved about in the bag, the plug/adapter put enough leverage on the socket, to break it from the board.
The sockets are soldered at each of the four legs (one at each corner of the socket) plus there is also a soldered flat surface on the face of the socket that touches the circuit board.
Overall it does take some force to lever the socket away, far more force than is encountered during normal use.

I presume that you would be using the Qutest in a static position, on a table or hifi rack. If so the risk of damage to the usb sockets will be very low. Chord do advise for all their dacs, to not use adapters plugged into the usb sockets, to reduce the risk even further.

From memory, I think Chord repaired all those mojo circuit boards free of charge.

I cannot speak for Chord, but there are plenty of reports of them going the extra mile, if there are problems with their other dacs.
Most issues that occur outside of warrenty, seem to be related to battery replacement, and that can be arranged for a fee.
However the battery will not be an issue for you with the qutest.

Hope this helps.


----------



## ChasingDopamine

miketlse said:


> I think it is an exaggeration to say that the Mojo has issues with its USB sockets. There have been maybe 5 reports of issues on head-fi, from 50,000+ units sold.
> The cases where sockets have broken off the circuit board, have usually occurred because the mojo was put in a rucksack (or similar) with a plug or adapter left in the socket. As the mojo moved about in the bag, the plug/adapter put enough leverage on the socket, to break it from the board.
> The sockets are soldered at each of the four legs (one at each corner of the socket) plus there is also a soldered flat surface on the face of the socket that touches the circuit board.
> Overall it does take some force to lever the socket away, far more force than is encountered during normal use.
> ...



My mojo has not had a problem with the USB ports, but I have been careful after reading of other people having issues.

Yes I would intend to keep it stationary. Probably even keep the cables inside and deal with them on the input/output devices. How long do you think I can expect the dac to last me? Hoping to get a good couple years out of it.


----------



## miketlse

ChasingDopamine said:


> My mojo has not had a problem with the USB ports, but I have been careful after reading of other people having issues.
> 
> Yes I would intend to keep it stationary. Probably even keep the cables inside and deal with them on the input/output devices. How long do you think I can expect the dac to last me? Hoping to get a good couple years out of it.


Most issues with chord gear seem to be either battery related, or app/software related (thinking primarily of the Poly), and neither of those issues should arise with qutest.
Some recent posters are still using chord dacs from the last decade, so physically I expect that the qutest would still work ok in a decades time.
More important for you, is how long you can resist the audiophile itch to upgrade to the next generation of qutest - maybe 3 years at a guess.


----------



## blueninjasix (Aug 2, 2018)

ChasingDopamine said:


> My mojo has not had a problem with the USB ports, but I have been careful after reading of other people having issues.
> 
> Yes I would intend to keep it stationary. Probably even keep the cables inside and deal with them on the input/output devices. How long do you think I can expect the dac to last me? Hoping to get a good couple years out of it.


At least a couple of years! I've still got a Deltec Bigger Bit (an earlier RW design that I bought in 1991) still going strong connected to my TV. Probably coming up to its 30th birthday!


----------



## ChasingDopamine

miketlse said:


> Most issues with chord gear seem to be either battery related, or app/software related (thinking primarily of the Poly), and neither of those issues should arise with qutest.
> Some recent posters are still using chord dacs from the last decade, so physically I expect that the qutest would still work ok in a decades time.
> More important for you, is how long you can resist the audiophile itch to upgrade to the next generation of qutest - maybe 3 years at a guess.



Who knows what's going to be around by then! At least the qutest would give me time to upgrade other parts of my chain before I have to consider the dac again. Was great listening to the Dave+m scaler at CanJam London 2018 but won't ever be able to stretch to it financially so pretty much my endgame level (for now). Still it's nice to know that if the product can still function after years I could recover some of the costs by selling it to fund the next obsession.


----------



## miketlse

ChasingDopamine said:


> Who knows what's going to be around by then! At least the qutest would give me time to upgrade other parts of my chain before I have to consider the dac again. Was great listening to the Dave+m scaler at CanJam London 2018 but won't ever be able to stretch to it financially so pretty much my endgame level (for now). Still it's nice to know that if the product can still function after years I could recover some of the costs by selling it to fund the next obsession.


Yes I wish that I had been able to attend canjam, to hear the TT2 and MScaler.
Chord seems to be following a strategy of updating each of the dacs after 3 years, so presumably you will be safe for about 3 years before making a decision about upgrading.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Anyone else had the chance to compare optical vs coax?I might be able to test it through the weekend...


----------



## OK-Guy (Aug 3, 2018)

ChasingDopamine said:


> Am I correct to believe the warranty is 3 years for parts and labour? Would repairs be possible after warranty (at a fee)?



Warranty periods for products are as follows:- Mojo/Poly is 12 months... Hugo2, HugoTT & Qute/Qutest is 3 years... pretty much everything else is 5 years.

The Warranty period is the same worldwide but the warranty is only valid in the region of purchase - i.e. you need to return your product to the retailer where it was purchased to get a warranty repair.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Sage Encore

Zzt231gr said:


> Anyone else had the chance to compare optical vs coax?I might be able to test it through the weekend...


Hi Sir,
I have the Qutest and I run it off my SP1000 as source, my setup being, PC or SP1000>Qutest>Sumaudio HAD430>Abyss Phi CC. I also have the iUSB Nano and idefender and a ipurifier in the line. My USB from iUSB Nano to Qutest uses the Gemini Dual Head cable. 

From PC to iUSB I use Wireworld Starlight 7 USB cable. From SP1000 I use a ifi OTG to hook up to the iUSB or I use a Chord optical cable.

Frankly, there is hardly any audible difference between the Optical or the USB connection. I can happily live with both forms of connection. But I now prefer Optical, as there is a slightly better warmth to the sound and also its so simple to hook up when I am using my SP1000 as source. My PC does not have a optical out. (Don't think computers have one).LOL

Hope this helps. I was actually thinking of adding a itube from ifi to see if I can get a slightly warmer sound. But I think its not really required now that I discovered that Optical is a better connection using my SP1000. (Thanks to Rob, saved a few quints).

Please feel free to add any comments as I am on a learning curve. Thank you.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Sage Encore said:


> Hi Sir,
> I have the Qutest and I run it off my SP1000 as source, my setup being, PC or SP1000>Qutest>Sumaudio HAD430>Abyss Phi CC. I also have the iUSB Nano and idefender and a ipurifier in the line. My USB from iUSB Nano to Qutest uses the Gemini Dual Head cable.
> 
> From PC to iUSB I use Wireworld Starlight 7 USB cable. From SP1000 I use a ifi OTG to hook up to the iUSB or I use a Chord optical cable.
> ...


Thank you for your detailed answer,my friend.The thing is I use a CD transport only and I want to compare the coaxial vs the optical input.


----------



## dac64

I just received the Qutest. Will connect it to the Sony Hap Z1-ES HDD transport tomorrow.


----------



## Sage Encore

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you for your detailed answer,my friend.The thing is I use a CD transport only and I want to compare the coaxial vs the optical input.


No worries sir, we are to exchange views. But personally, I am so glad I stumbled upon Rob's recommendation to go the optical route. Have a good weekend.


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> I just received the Qutest. Will connect it to the Sony Hap Z1-ES HDD transport tomorrow.


Enjoy!



Sage Encore said:


> No worries sir, we are to exchange views. But personally, I am so glad I stumbled upon Rob's recommendation to go the optical route. Have a good weekend.


Of course!You too!


----------



## Zzt231gr (Aug 3, 2018)

In the process... Update!After about 2 hours of testing,I have my results.Anyone else in the works who wants to post his findings before I polarize the outcome?


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Aug 3, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you for your detailed answer,my friend.The thing is I use a CD transport only and I want to compare the coaxial vs the optical input.



Hi, I primarily use a Cyrus CD Xt Signature CD Transport (highly rated and mid high end at £1750) into a Hugo 2 in an amp and speaker system. I originally used coax but prefer Optical as per recommendation from Rob W. I use a cable from sysconcept.ca but would recommend kabeldirekt as I hear great reviews (and Rob W has himself said he liked their overall quality but he referred to another type of cable), and they are very cheap (high value). Why not try one as i doubt you need anything more fancy/expensive! Just a recommendation... Coax seem to give more detail (more open sound) than optical but to me that is not worth it in terms of overall musicality and warmer sound of optical. Remember to not have the coaxial in place when comparing. Hope that helps.

Edit: I also hear great reviews of QEDs glass optical cable and you may want to listen and compare kabeldirekt to that once (when!) you decide optical is best, but to me sysconcept seem to have higher spec so I have not bothered - kabeldirekt will be excellent so don’t worry...)


----------



## jayz (Aug 4, 2018)

The question I have is, from a technical perspective, since differences in jitter has no affect on the Qutest, and we know optical cables do not transfer or induce or attract noise, then what other property determines whether one cable is better than the other? Purely on that basis, a £5 cable off ebay should sound no different to a QED Reference Quartz or kabeldirekt. Or is it the transfer efficiency of cable including connector ? And how would that affect the pure data bits i.e. untimed information. And I wonder whether the quality of material and construction of the cable is being confused with its  technical performance.

If someone who compared optical cables can explain their findings then it might help.


----------



## miketlse

jayz said:


> The question I have is, from a technical perspective, since differences in jitter has no affect on the Qutest, and we know optical cables do not transfer or induce or attract noise, then what other property determines whether one cable is better than the other? Purely on that basis, a £5 cable off ebay should sound no different to a QED Reference Quartz or kabeldirekt. Or is it the transfer efficiency of cable including connector ? And how would that affect the pure data bits i.e. untimed information. And I wonder whether the quality of material and construction of the cable is being confused with its  technical performance.
> 
> If someone who compared optical cables can explain their findings then it might help.


First read the section on optical cables, within the faq in post #3 of the mojo thread. The information is generic to all the dacs.


----------



## Zzt231gr (Aug 4, 2018)

Ok.After about 2 hours of testing yesterday with multiple instrumental tracks,it seems that optical has better depth layering and smoother instrument reproduction.The difference is very subtle and one has to listen carefully to notice it.

I didn't notice any brightness on the coax output vs optical,neither stage width reduction in optical,as some fellow members posted before.Also,detail seems to be exactly the same,if not better with optical.

The testing was done with ABA testing-A being optical-since I knew well the coax sound signature.

My optical cable is Belkin Ultimate series and is very well constructed.I don't think I would benefit from something else,would I?


I also have one problem now...My PS4 which I occassionally want to use through Qutest has only optical output.Is there an audiophile adapter to use to another input?


Latest edit.I noticed some dryness to the edges of brass organs and cymbals with coax.


----------



## Zzt231gr

miketlse said:


> First read the section on optical cables, within the faq in post #3 of the mojo thread. The information is generic to all the dacs.


Could you please provide a link?


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> Could you please provide a link?


page https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-mojo-dac-amp-☆★►faq-in-3rd-post-◄★☆.784602/
section below

the info about 

plastic v glass
end cap or no end cap
clear or scratched end cap
etc
is generic, and should be a first point of call, when trying to improve optical
no-one wants to experience the frustration of rushing out, and spending $200 on a cable, when the only thing wrong with the original cable was that the end cap had become dirty/lost etc.



*(NB: please also view the videos section!)*

*IMPORTANT : It is YOUR responsibility to make sure that the cable you are buying correctly fits the connectors on your equipment. None of these links are official endorsements*_._


*Mojos optical input is a standard Toslink Optical socket. However, many DAPs have optical outputs using 3.5mm sockets, so PLEASE CHECK before buying an optical cable*
 


 



www.head-fi.org/t/784602/chord-mojo-the-official-thread/2880#post_12032024

www.head-fi.org/t/784602/chord-mojo-the-official-thread/2265#post_12023214  (specifically to a Mac computer)

related (_non_-Mojo-specific) discussion about optical cables: www.head-fi.org/t/784602/chord-mojo-the-official-thread/2250#post_12023147


----------



## Amberlamps

Whats that 768khz special operation mode on mojo for ?

I’ve seen that twice this morning, so whats up with the Spec Ops mode.

Is it for high speed special forces types so that they get to listen to, crystal clear music whilst shooting up mud hut villages.

If so, can I get some, get some, get some, get some.


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Aug 4, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Ok.After about 2 hours of testing yesterday with multiple instrumental tracks,it seems that optical has better depth layering and smoother instrument reproduction.The difference is very subtle and one has to listen carefully to notice it.
> 
> I didn't notice any brightness on the coax output vs optical,neither stage width reduction in optical,as some fellow members posted before.Also,detail seems to be exactly the same,if not better with optical.
> 
> ...



I think your optical cable is just fine. For people that use hi res, not all support up to 24/192 and the ones i mention in previous post reportedly does. I have not compared to other cables other than the provided Hugo 2 stock cable and I thought I could here improvements in that it was just more clear. This could well be expectation bias and i am not sure i could notice the difference in a/b blind testing. Thank you for links  miketlse , i will study...


----------



## miketlse

Phuca said:


> Whats that 768khz special operation mode on mojo for ?
> 
> I’ve seen that twice this morning, so whats up with the Spec Ops mode.
> 
> ...


Special Ops mate.
If we tell you the details, we then have to terminate you.


----------



## dawktah2 (Aug 4, 2018)

I'm still a believer that electronics and accessories (cables) especially fall on a sigmoid curve. With price on X axis and improvement on the Y. The curve has a steep portion in the middle with a plateau. Meaning there's a big jump in improvement with investment but after that you get little improvement with big changes in expense. The only thing that doesn't fit this curve are proprietary products that are priced high from the start... IMHO


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> I'm still a believer that electronics and accessories especially fall on a sigmoid curve. With price on X axis and improvement on the Y. The curve has a steep portion in the middle with a plateau. Meaning there's a big jump in improvement with investment but after that you get little improvement with big changes in expense. The only thing that doesn't fit this curve are proprietary products that are priced high from the start... IMHO


Man, you could be right, but you are going to make me draw a graph, and think about it. 
Does this case represent just the position at a fixed date, or can it be integrated into a product timeline/roadmap view?


----------



## Amberlamps

OK-Guy said:


> Warranty periods for products are as follows:- Mojo/Poly is 12 months... Hugo2, HugoTT & Qute/Qutest is 3 years... pretty much everything else is 5 years.
> 
> The Warranty period is the same worldwide but the warranty is only valid in the region of purchase - i.e. you need to return your product to the retailer where it was purchased to get a warranty repair.
> 
> Hope that helps.



Except in the UK where its a statutory 6 years in England and 5 in Scotland and 6 all over the EU, and since we are still in the EU its 6, once we brexit, its still 5 or 6 years.

You ever wonder why tv’s are now proudly boasting “now comes with a free 6 year warranty”, they make it out to sound like they are doing us a favour when actually its standard UK / EU consumer rights law.

So, if anyones hugo blows up 4 years are purchase, you still have atleast 1 more year warranty, possibly two depending on your location.


----------



## plsvn

are you sure? *2* years, afaik and can see searching online, is EU warranty


----------



## Triode User

plsvn said:


> are you sure? *2* years, afaik and can see searching online, is EU warranty



Yep, I thought the EU period is 2 yrs, 6yrs in UK apart from Scotland which is 5 yrs. And note that this applies to the retailer and not the manufacturer and covers a fault that was present when you bought the item or a defect that occurs from a manufacturing problem rather than as the result of wear and tear.


----------



## Kalavere

So having had a little search though the thread, it seems some people at least are okay with powering their Qutest via other methods other than the wall-wart.

How about powering it through a USB-C port in my laptop? Power via laptop USB-C into the DAC and then USB out into a USB-A in my laptop? 

I know Rob Watts himself has said he's used a power bank before, so I assume suing a USB-C port for power is a-okay?


----------



## Rob Watts

Kalavere said:


> So having had a little search though the thread, it seems some people at least are okay with powering their Qutest via other methods other than the wall-wart.
> 
> How about powering it through a USB-C port in my laptop? Power via laptop USB-C into the DAC and then USB out into a USB-A in my laptop?
> 
> I know Rob Watts himself has said he's used a power bank before, so I assume suing a USB-C port for power is a-okay?



Not a good idea - you would be shorting the galvanic isolation on the USB inputs. Source ground and DAC ground must be isolated for the best SQ, so don't power the DAC and lap-top together.


----------



## Amberlamps (Aug 5, 2018)

plsvn said:


> are you sure? *2* years, afaik and can see searching online, is EU warranty



From new to broken within 6 months, the product is deemed to be faulty from the day you bought it and you are allowed to ask for your money back. You don’t need to have it repaired or replaced if its less than 6 months old.  EU wide.

After 6 months you have to let the retailer chose how to proceed, repair, replace or refund. EU wide.

2 years is the minimum no fuss warranty period that retailers have to give by law. EU wide.

After the minimum warranty has expired, 2 years, you have to prove that there is an inherent fault with the device, if you wan’t to use the upto 6 years law. Not sure if that law is just for us in the UK, or if it also applies to the EU ? anyway.

Example, TV’s, Say the capacitors inside the TV, say they started to leak and pop 4 years after purchase, that would be an inherent fault, even though they were ok when you first bought it.

Not sure if you remember, about 15 years ago a chinese dude stole “fake” electrolyte ingredients for a long lasting capacitor design from his japanese employer. For years after, everything that those capacitors were in, started dieing.  ***( The Japanese set him up the bomb, and all his caps really did belong to us.)

That would be an inherent fault, ok on day 1, but by day 1400 totally wrecked. Basically every motherboard that was built at that time was destined to blow up years before they should of. It cost dell alone, 300 million to fix/replace the faulty computers.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ors-causing-computers-to-burn-out-106907.html

Happily, nowadays its easier to find out if something has an inherent fault. Just google whatever it is thats broke and the symptoms, if you get lots of other people saying the same thing, its a step nearer to getting your kit repaired/replaced for free years later.

However, trying to convince a retailer is probably better done by sending an email or letter to their head office, as its doubtful some kid behind a til/cash register will know What to do when you turn up with a broken 5 year old TV.

I have never needed to try it, usually if something of mine dies 5 years later, I usually just buy a replacement but, say I bought a DAVE, if that died, you better believe I would hit up my retailer to get it fixed.

I will add, things like mobile phones and other portable devices, they would probably not be covered by that upto 5/6 year warranty due to their portable/mobile nature.


*** Don’t mess with my meme.


----------



## TheoS53




----------



## OK-Guy (Aug 5, 2018)

I really wouldn't concern yourselves about the quality of Chord products, they're literally built to withstand the attentions of a T55 tank...



reminds me of that ole saying 'Chord products are built for life and not just for the warranty period'.


----------



## Kalavere

Rob Watts said:


> Not a good idea - you would be shorting the galvanic isolation on the USB inputs. Source ground and DAC ground must be isolated for the best SQ, so don't power the DAC and lap-top together.



Many thanks for the reply, Rob. I'll keep it separate from my laptop power.


----------



## x RELIC x (Aug 5, 2018)

TheoS53 said:


>




Funny, I find the iDAC2 to sound ‘slow’ to me, and I was baffled when I first heard it. I realize many like the sound of the iDAC2, but even compared to the Mojo it didn’t cut the mustard for me. I still have the iDAC2 sitting in a drawer so I should bring it out again for another listen after watching your iFi Qutest video.


----------



## rhern213

OK-Guy said:


> I really wouldn't concern yourselves about the quality of Chord products, they're literally built to withstand the attentions of a T55 tank...
> reminds me of that ole saying 'Chord products are built for life and not just for the warranty period'.



I'm skeptical of that, I think they put the tank in track mode for the cd-player and in comfort suspension mode for the chord


----------



## plsvn

TheoS53 said:


>




great review indeed of... iFi stuff!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hey guys,can you please tell me how to connect to Qutest a second optical source without sound quality degradation?
Thank you in advance.


----------



## Rob Watts

You could try an optical switch:

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p...NacOTwMeAO2xaCQ4bMWiV4DHLVY9phvQaAo3UEALw_wcB

Assuming the optical attenuation is not a problem, you won't get any SQ loss.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> You could try an optical switch:
> 
> https://www.monoprice.com/product?p...NacOTwMeAO2xaCQ4bMWiV4DHLVY9phvQaAo3UEALw_wcB
> 
> Assuming the optical attenuation is not a problem, you won't get any SQ loss.


Do you find this device reliable?

Is the kind of switch inside this thing the same that is used in dacs with 2 optical inputs?

Would an optical to coaxial adaptor be equal or better?


----------



## OK-Guy

rhern213 said:


> I'm skeptical of that, I think they put the tank in track mode for the cd-player and in comfort suspension mode for the chord



always wondered why the wheels bounced up & down...


----------



## Rob Watts

Zzt231gr said:


> Do you find this device reliable?
> 
> Is the kind of switch inside this thing the same that is used in dacs with 2 optical inputs?
> 
> Would an optical to coaxial adaptor be equal or better?



I have no idea how well it works, but switching with mirrors is not mechanically difficult, so it ought to work fine. It's cheap, so give it a try.

DACs with two optical inputs are very different - the switching is done internally with electrical signals, not switching the light itself.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> I have no idea how well it works, but switching with mirrors is not mechanically difficult, so it ought to work fine. It's cheap, so give it a try.
> 
> DACs with two optical inputs are very different - the switching is done internally with electrical signals, not switching the light itself.


Just to the idea that I lose 1% of the sound quality...

How well does an optical to coaxial adaptor works?


----------



## Amberlamps (Aug 6, 2018)

OK-Guy said:


> I really wouldn't concern yourselves about the quality of Chord products, they're literally built to withstand the attentions of a T55 tank...
> 
> 
> 
> reminds me of that ole saying 'Chord products are built for life and not just for the warranty period'.




I don’t think anyone is worried about Chord stuff dieing, it’s more of a general know your consumer law type thing.

The only thing that I would be concerned about and which everyone here has mutiple devices that contain them, is batteries, but they are designed with failure in mind and gladly can be replaced easily.

   Tanks and Chord   which =    but      However......

LOL  USA                < what happens when countries print their own monopoly money.




***Head-fi admins, please fix this website, it’s got a mind of its own at times and can be extremely buggy and slow.***


----------



## Triode User

Phuca said:


> ***Head-fi admins, please fix this website, it’s got a mind of its own at times and can be extremely buggy and slow.***



I find it one of the faster sites and never have any issues with it on iMac, iPad or iPhone. Are you sure it is the site?


----------



## x RELIC x

Phuca said:


> ***Head-fi admins, please fix this website, it’s got a mind of its own at times and can be extremely buggy and slow.***



You’d get much more help by posting details of your issue in this thread:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/new-site-platform-bug-reports-and-feedback-thread.845502/


----------



## maxh22

Phuca said:


> I don’t think anyone is worried about Chord stuff dieing, it’s more of a general know your consumer law type thing.
> 
> The only thing that I would be concerned about and which everyone here has mutiple devices that contain them, is batteries, but they are designed with failure in mind and gladly can be replaced easily.
> 
> ...





Triode User said:


> I find it one of the faster sites and never have any issues with it on iMac, iPad or iPhone. Are you sure it is the site?



No issues on my end, everything always loads quickly even on the go on my T-Mobile LTE.

Perhaps you have some virus or malware on your computer that could be causing some slowdowns.


----------



## jwbrent (Aug 6, 2018)

plsvn said:


> great review indeed of... iFi stuff!



I love the minimalism of the Qutest design as well as the heft of the chassis (and the sound is fabulous on my speaker system!). I agree that iFi makes products with lots of flexibility and features, and that their components are very good values for the money, but part of the reason iFi is able to do this is because their products are sourced from China. The Qutest is made in England which inherently raises the cost of manufacture.

My only niggle about the Qutest is that the first warm filter should have been a color that is clearly identifiable from the second warm filter; dark orange and red are easily confused, yellow would have been better. At least in my sample the color difference is hard to discern without paying close attention.


----------



## Amberlamps (Aug 6, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> You’d get much more help by posting details of your issue in this thread:
> 
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/new-site-platform-bug-reports-and-feedback-thread.845502/



I have already done so, ages ago. It’s not worth repeating if they take no notice/action. But it would be nice as its a complete pita.




maxh22 said:


> No issues on my end, everything always loads quickly even on the go on my T-Mobile LTE.
> 
> Perhaps you have some virus or malware on your computer that could be causing some slowdowns.




Perhaps not. No virus or malware.

Maybe it’s slow, but still fast enough for US users ?  It’s not all the time, but it seems to be traffic and time related, read as, when america wakens up, has lunch or in the evening. Plus I am not the only european thats affected, others also have mentioned it.

<  300 mbit “no contention business isp”, this site is the “only big website”, wait......I will rephrase that, it’s the “ONLY” website I have problems with. Seriously, it really is the only this website, not all the time, just seems certain times of the day. I would also think if it was just me, it would be happening to every websites but nope, just this one.

At times it takes ages to turn a page or refresh a page. When making a post, one minute it can be really smooth aka normal and the next it’s like trying to leave north korea with a souvenir that just happened to fall off a wall and into your suitcase, schiit ain’t happening.

My dog has just farted and What, I am sure,  if Head-Fi was a human and got to smell one of my dogs farts, it would turn up the speed dial and take off in like 3ms.

Latency mf’s, do you smell it ?


----------



## Rhamnetin

The Chord Hugo 2 is the best DAC I've owned to date, made the mistake of selling it though. Considering this and the fact that I DON'T need portability, should I get another Hugo 2 or go for a Qutest? The Qutest does have dual BNCs for the upcoming Hugo M Scaler which I'll probably get in the future. 

In other words, does the Qutest sound identical or near identical to the Hugo 2?


----------



## dawktah2

Based on posts on this thread it sounds better than the Hugo 2, so "near identical?"


----------



## rhern213

Rhamnetin said:


> The Chord Hugo 2 is the best DAC I've owned to date, made the mistake of selling it though. Considering this and the fact that I DON'T need portability, should I get another Hugo 2 or go for a Qutest? The Qutest does have dual BNCs for the upcoming Hugo M Scaler which I'll probably get in the future.
> 
> In other words, does the Qutest sound identical or near identical to the Hugo 2?



They're the same internals until the output ports. Rob has said if you're using it for headphones the Hugo2 should be a better option because the internal op-amp would provide a more transparent signal to the HP's. If you need an external amp then the Qutest would be better because of GI, more connection options, and price.


----------



## Rhamnetin

rhern213 said:


> They're the same internals until the output ports. Rob has said if you're using it for headphones the Hugo2 should be a better option because the internal op-amp would provide a more transparent signal to the HP's. If you need an external amp then the Qutest would be better because of GI, more connection options, and price.



I'd be using an external headphone amp, so this would only be used as a DAC. They have a differing power supply design? That can affect sound greatly if so. But if I can get essentially the same sound as only a DAC as the Hugo 2 for $800 less, well that's just very appealing!


----------



## rhern213

Rhamnetin said:


> I'd be using an external headphone amp, so this would only be used as a DAC. They have a differing power supply design? That can affect sound greatly if so. But if I can get essentially the same sound as only a DAC as the Hugo 2 for $800 less, well that's just very appealing!



I got a battery pack for my Qutest so it should be as close to the Hugo2's internal battery as you can get. Some people say upgrading the stock wall-wart makes it better, I've tried 3 different PS's, all of them sounded exactly the same to me as the stock wall-wart. The only better option was the battery pack, and I can only hear a slightly smoother sound in only very specific parts where I was trying to hear for it. Otherwise I would never hear the difference either.


----------



## x RELIC x

Rhamnetin said:


> I'd be using an external headphone amp, so this would only be used as a DAC. They have a differing power supply design? That can affect sound greatly if so. But if I can get essentially the same sound as only a DAC as the Hugo 2 for $800 less, well that's just very appealing!



The Qutest OP stage is based on Mojo so different from the Hugo2 on the analogue side, and it sounds a little different according to some user reports. Also, Hugo2 can use the M scaler’s full output as well with its dual coaxial inputs. Food for thought to muddy your decision a bit.


----------



## Joe-Siow

x RELIC x said:


> Also, Hugo2 can use the M scaler’s full output as well with its dual coaxial inputs. Food for thought to muddy your decision a bit.



If I am correct, the Qutest may also be used with the Hugo M Scaler since it also has a pair of BNC inputs.


----------



## x RELIC x

Joe-Siow said:


> If I am correct, the Qutest may also be used with the Hugo M Scaler since it also has a pair of BNC inputs.



Yes, of course it is. I was just confirming for @Rhamnetin that the Hugo2 also works fully with the M scaler. There has been much confusion regarding the M scaler and Hugo2.


----------



## Nik74

Concentrating all my attention on Hugo TT and M-Scaler I completely overlooked Qutest and it sounds like it may be exactly the upgrade that I need. I can justify it financially and as I m using a tube headphone amp, it is probably going to be more suitable than my Hugo. 
Question here is how much of a sonic improvement am I going to get. Does anyone still have a Hugo lying around and maybe able to put the Qutest and Hugo side by side for a comparison? In terms of features the Qutest covers me completely , my system is a simple one source desktop. And if I manage to save, I d be able to benefit from the addition of the M-scaler, from what I m reading so far , such addition wouldn't be overkill. Decisions, decisions...


----------



## dac64 (Aug 7, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> Concentrating all my attention on Hugo TT and M-Scaler I completely overlooked Qutest and it sounds like it may be exactly the upgrade that I need. I can justify it financially and as I m using a tube headphone amp, it is probably going to be more suitable than my Hugo.
> Question here is how much of a sonic improvement am I going to get. Does anyone still have a Hugo lying around and maybe able to put the Qutest and Hugo side by side for a comparison? In terms of features the Qutest covers me completely , my system is a simple one source desktop. And if I manage to save, I d be able to benefit from the addition of the M-scaler, from what I m reading so far , such addition wouldn't be overkill. Decisions, decisions...



HMS + Qutest sounds better than Dave alone!

If you already have a headphone then Qutest.

Any more questions?


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> HMS + Qutest sounds better than Dave alone!
> 
> If you already have a headphone then Qutest.
> 
> Any more questions?


Yes!What is HMS????


----------



## Triode User

Zzt231gr said:


> Yes!What is HMS????



Hugo MScaler.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Thank you guys.

Do we have review of it?


----------



## Triode User

No. It has only just been announced and production units are not due until Autumn 2018. However, by it's very nature it will sound similar if not identical to the MScaler part of Blu Mk2. It has the added advantage that we are told that unlike the Blu Mk2 MScaler it will not benefit from ferrites on the dual BNC cables to the DAC. People are therefore already placing pre-orders on the basis that they know what they will get.


----------



## Nik74

dac64 said:


> HMS + Qutest sounds better than Dave alone!
> 
> If you already have a headphone then Qutest.
> 
> Any more questions?



That is a very enthusiastic statement that I really want to believe but find it difficult to comprehend. Have you actually compared Qutest with HMS against Dave? In what areas does it sound better?


----------



## Rhamnetin

Yeah I wonder what Rob has to say about such pairings. Lower end Chord DAC plus M Scaler vs just a higher end Chord DAC.


----------



## jwbrent (Aug 8, 2018)

Rhamnetin said:


> The Chord Hugo 2 is the best DAC I've owned to date, made the mistake of selling it though. Considering this and the fact that I DON'T need portability, should I get another Hugo 2 or go for a Qutest? The Qutest does have dual BNCs for the upcoming Hugo M Scaler which I'll probably get in the future.
> 
> In other words, does the Qutest sound identical or near identical to the Hugo 2?



The digital to analog technology employed between the Hugo 2 and Qutest is identical, the reason for the Hugo’s greater expense is its portability and Bluetooth capability, and what Chord plans as an add on along the lines of a Poly for the Mojo.

The reason why many assert the Qutest sounds better, I suppose, is the galvanic isolation which the Hugo 2 does not have. Additionally, the heft of the Qutest chassis may also be providing a sound improvement due to reduced resonance. Although some will argue the Hugo 2 allows for battery operation in order to avoid the noise issues of AC, as Rob has previously reported, he uses an external battery pack with his Qutest.

So, my advice is if you don’t care about portability or Bluetooth, go with the Qutest for better sound and around $800 in savings. That’s what I did.


----------



## jwbrent

oops, I forgot to mention headphone capability on the Hugo 2.


----------



## dawktah2 (Aug 8, 2018)

musicman59 said:


> Check out the PrimaLuna Dialogue Premium HP. It is an integrated amplifier that has headphones output running through the same circuits as the speaker outputs. It has Ultra-Linear and Triode mode outputs that can be change on the fly and it has a remote control.
> I upgraded the 12AU7 to NOS Mullard and the EL34 to NOS Simmens. It really sounds very good and is powerful.



Just got home from auditioning Prima Luna Dialogue and it's impressive. Soundstage is very wide and detail was top notch. My Qutest was source. I used cables from dealer. Is the sound being produced "reference?" Sound was very airy and brighter than WA8. That being said as awesome as it is, it didn't have enough low end for me. I guess I suffer from driving around in the 90's with a subwoofer in the trunk. Soundtracks have enough but jazz and R&B lack the "feeling..."

Is the TT 2 going to sound similar, so I'll have to decide to go reference or chase the dragon.


----------



## plsvn

dawktah2 said:


> it didn't have enough low end for me



plenty of deep, punchy, perfectly controlled low end, here, from my Qutest, a 2A3 amplifier (or a FW J2) and horn speakers with 15" woofers
so... Qutest is not at all to blame


----------



## musicman59

dawktah2 said:


> Just got home from auditioning Prima Luna Dialogue and it's impressive. Soundstage is very wide and detail was top notch. My Qutest was source. I used cables from dealer. Is the sound being produced "reference?" Sound was very airy and brighter than WA8. That being said as awesome as it is, it didn't have enough low end for me. I guess I suffer from driving around in the 90's with a subwoofer in the trunk. Soundtracks have enough but jazz and R&B lack the "feeling..."
> 
> Is the TT 2 going to sound similar, so I'll have to decide to go reference or chase the dragon.


To my personal taste and limited exposure to the WA-8 it always sounded on the dark side to me. I am a fan of Woo amps but not particularly of the WA-8.

You probably audition the PrimaLuna with the stock tubes. Remember you can change the sound with the great flexibility it provides on the power tubes.

I am running it with NOS Mullard drivers and NOS Siemens EL34. IMO opinion none of my headphones lack bass but we all hear different and have different taste in our sound.


----------



## dawktah2

plsvn said:


> plenty of deep, punchy, perfectly controlled low end, here, from my Qutest, a 2A3 amplifier (or a FW J2) and horn speakers with 15" woofers
> so... Qutest is not at all to blame



Absolutely!  I noticed right away when I upgraded my DAC to the Qutest that it had better low end resolution.  I like the Chord sound.



musicman59 said:


> To my personal taste and limited exposure to the WA-8 it always sounded on the dark side to me. I am a fan of Woo amps but not particularly of the WA-8.
> 
> You probably audition the PrimaLuna with the stock tubes. Remember you can change the sound with the great flexibility it provides on the power tubes.
> 
> I am running it with NOS Mullard drivers and NOS Siemens EL34. IMO opinion none of my headphones lack bass but we all hear different and have different taste in our sound.



The dark side...  I guess I will forever be tainted by Star Wars.   My dad had an H.H. Scott and the speakers had a rich dark tone.  Combine that with years of being a DJ and early adapter to Surround Sound.  Once I audition the TT 2 I'll know which path I'll be on.


----------



## dac64 (Aug 9, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> That is a very enthusiastic statement that I really want to believe but find it difficult to comprehend. Have you actually compared Qutest with HMS against Dave? In what areas does it sound better?



Well, the feedback was from a blu/dave/hugo2, maybe qutest too, user. He said dave was the 4th best but the best was still Blu/Dave or HMS/Dave.

Btw, HMS/TT2 should be 2nd best now!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob says he uses a battery pack because of better sound quality?


----------



## dac64 (Aug 9, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Rob says he uses a battery pack because of better sound quality?



Rob said if you heard no different between the stock power supply and battery pack then don't have to buy lps.

And he used battery pack was because he can't find a wall outlet from the plane!


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> Rob said if you heard no different between the stock power supply and battery pack then don't have to buy lps.
> 
> And he used battery pack was because he can't find a wall outlet from the plane!


Thank you.That is what I remember...


----------



## jwbrent

dawktah2 said:


> Just got home from auditioning Prima Luna Dialogue and it's impressive. Soundstage is very wide and detail was top notch. My Qutest was source. I used cables from dealer. Is the sound being produced "reference?" Sound was very airy and brighter than WA8. That being said as awesome as it is, it didn't have enough low end for me. I guess I suffer from driving around in the 90's with a subwoofer in the trunk. Soundtracks have enough but jazz and R&B lack the "feeling..."
> 
> Is the TT 2 going to sound similar, so I'll have to decide to go reference or chase the dragon.



Doesn’t this amplifier allow for changing the output tubes from EL34-KT6550-KT88-KT90? If so, a tube change can make a big difference in the bass.


----------



## jwbrent

plsvn said:


> plenty of deep, punchy, perfectly controlled low end, here, from my Qutest, a 2A3 amplifier (or a FW J2) and horn speakers with 15" woofers
> so... Qutest is not at all to blame



Agreed, no issues with bass on the Qutest.


----------



## jwbrent

Zzt231gr said:


> Rob says he uses a battery pack because of better sound quality?



I extrapolated his comments to mean all the time, not just on a plane. My error ... maybe.


----------



## dawktah2 (Aug 11, 2018)

jwbrent said:


> Agreed, no issues with bass on the Qutest.



As I had mentioned in post #1925 Qutest itself has great low end. I guess the setup they had was a bright one. Given the myriad of tubes out there I could conceivably buy the equivalent expense in tubes trying to get the right ones...

Unless Prima Luna knows "exactly" which ones create the darkest voice.


----------



## jwbrent

dawktah2 said:


> As I had mentioned in post #1925 Qutest itself has great low end. I guess the setup they had was a bright one. Given the myriad of tubes out there I could conceivably buy the equivalent expense in tubes trying to get the right ones...
> 
> Unless Prima Luna knows "exactly" which ones create the darkest voice.



Kevin Deal at Upscale Audio is the Prima Luna US distributor, and he’s also a tube vendor. I would speak with him about which of the various output tubes will give you the sound you’re looking for. A friend of mine bought KT90s for his Prima Luna integrated and loved the upgrade in sound.


----------



## dawktah2

jwbrent said:


> Kevin Deal at Upscale Audio is the Prima Luna US distributor, and he’s also a tube vendor. I would speak with him about which of the various output tubes will give you the sound you’re looking for. A friend of mine bought KT90s for his Prima Luna integrated and loved the upgrade in sound.



Thanks, I will contact him


----------



## beemarman

I was able to get the Blu2 for a good price, so I decided to give it a try with the Quest. I can confirm that it makes the Quest come to life in a way I didn't think would be possible.

I used to have the DAVE on it's own, but had to sell it. The quest with the Blu2 sounds much better than the DAVE on it's own. I'm still going to replace the quest for the DAVE sometime in the future, but not in a great rush to do so

Does that are wondering whether the new Mscaler would make a difference when combined with the Quest are in for a big surprise.

My setup:
Chord Blu2 
Chord Quest 
Trilogy 933 amp
Focal Utopia.


----------



## dac64 (Aug 14, 2018)

beemarman said:


> I was able to get the Blu2 for a good price, so I decided to give it a try with the Quest. I can confirm that it makes the Quest come to life in a way I didn't think would be possible.
> 
> I used to have the DAVE on it's own, but had to sell it. The quest with the Blu2 sounds much better than the DAVE on it's own...



This was the reason i bought a Qutest in stead of Dave.

Enjoy the breakthrough of 1M taps at the minimum cost.

And wait for the next chord flagship dac, maybe five years later.

However, HMS might be outdated by then 

On second thought, maybe the new 2M/4M HMS is able to accept the dual BNC inputs from 1M HMS...

If this is the case then 1M or blu2 is a must buy...

Irregardless of what, I have five years, at least, to save for the next upgrade!


----------



## dawktah2 (Aug 14, 2018)

All this good news has me in a delimma. I go back and forth between keeping Qutest and getting a headphone amp (no DAC) vs. trading it in for the TT 2.

Prima Luna Dialogue HP has been suggested since I need a remote control. Downside is cost of new tubes to darken sound. In addition tubes have to be replaced. I also don't know if it will be susceptible to the HVAC noise like my current tube amp.

I will have to audition the TT2 which the only way to darken its sound is through cables and different headphones, right?

Good thing we're months away.


----------



## Zzt231gr

beemarman said:


> I was able to get the Blu2 for a good price, so I decided to give it a try with the Quest. I can confirm that it makes the Quest come to life in a way I didn't think would be possible.
> 
> I used to have the DAVE on it's own, but had to sell it. The quest with the Blu2 sounds much better than the DAVE on it's own. I'm still going to replace the quest for the DAVE sometime in the future, but not in a great rush to do so
> 
> ...


Which transport did you heve before my friend?


----------



## beemarman

Zzt231gr said:


> Which transport did you heve before my friend?



Chord Dave.


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> Which transport did you heve before my friend?



He didn't have any before!


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> He didn't have any before!


I see.

Isn't Dave a dac only?


----------



## beemarman

Zzt231gr said:


> I see.
> 
> Isn't Dave a dac only?


Dave is a DAC and headphone amp


----------



## Zagato (Aug 15, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> All this good news has me in a delimma. I go back and forth between keeping Qutest and getting a headphone amp (no DAC) vs. trading it in for the TT 2.
> 
> Prima Luna Dialogue HP has been suggested since I need a remote control. Downside is cost of new tubes to darken sound. In addition tubes have to be replaced. I also don't know if it will be susceptible to the HVAC noise like my current tube amp.
> 
> ...


Also TT2 can power speakers direct - 18W RMS into 8 ohm using balanced output


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> All this good news has me in a delimma. I go back and forth between keeping Qutest and getting a headphone amp (no DAC) vs. trading it in for the TT 2.


All I can suggest, is don't get downheartened.
I remember originally thinking that the 2Qute was the solution, then changing my mind because of the 3V output, and then setting my mind on ordering the Hugo TT, after CES 2017.
At CES 2017 Chord revealed the Hugo 2, which offered the functionality that I wanted at half the price, so I bought Hugo 2.
We are now reaching the period of 2018, where there are few remaining audio shows, so probably few totally new interesting products before CES 2019.
My advice is wait a few weeks, and read the user feedback for TT2 in October (October is stated in good faith, but do not flame me if there are delays).
You will then be in a far more informed position, to decide how to proceed.


----------



## Boogie7910

So is this basically a Hugo 2 without the amp and batteries?


----------



## OK-Guy

beemarman said:


> Dave is a DAC and headphone amp



and a pre-amp.


----------



## miketlse

Boogie7910 said:


> So is this basically a Hugo 2 without the amp and batteries?


plus galvanic protection, for those who need only a desktop solution.


----------



## dawktah2

miketlse said:


> All I can suggest, is don't get downheartened.
> I remember originally thinking that the 2Qute was the solution, then changing my mind because of the 3V output, and then setting my mind on ordering the Hugo TT, after CES 2017.
> At CES 2017 Chord revealed the Hugo 2, which offered the functionality that I wanted at half the price, so I bought Hugo 2.
> We are now reaching the period of 2018, where there are few remaining audio shows, so probably few totally new interesting products before CES 2019.
> ...



I'm going to Atlanta in November so hopefully they will have one for audition.  I won't be near another dealer that could possibly have one for audition.  Maybe I should become a dealer...


----------



## miketlse

dawktah2 said:


> I'm going to Atlanta in November so hopefully they will have one for audition.  I won't be near another dealer that could possibly have one for audition.  Maybe I should become a dealer...


Fingers crossed for you


----------



## stuart1927

I just got a Qutest today and have it connected up to a Line Magnetic 518 ia tube amp with lots of tasty tubes. I'm frankly amazed how good this combo sounds. I was previously using an LKS mh003 dac, which is no slouch, but the Qutest is quite remarkable. Endless detail, balance and a nice warmth on the bass, but still with clarity and punch. It seems to do everything well. Been listening to Hiromi's "Move" tonight.....it's one of the best audiophile gear test's I know...Hiromi's piano is in the room (wish she was too!) ...Anthony Jackson's Contrabass really sings and shakes the floor, and Simon Philips kit sounds are replicated with amazing finesse. What a superb dac. Of course, credit to the Line Magnetic....one of the best tube amps on the planet IMHO!


----------



## jwbrent

dawktah2 said:


> All this good news has me in a delimma. I go back and forth between keeping Qutest and getting a headphone amp (no DAC) vs. trading it in for the TT 2.
> 
> Prima Luna Dialogue HP has been suggested since I need a remote control. Downside is cost of new tubes to darken sound. In addition tubes have to be replaced. I also don't know if it will be susceptible to the HVAC noise like my current tube amp.
> 
> ...



The TT2 has more taps than the Qutest, but if one is using the M Scaler, I don’t know if that makes a difference in sound.

It really depends if you like simplicity. The TT2 is going to sound better, plus, if you want to upgrade the performance down the road, you can get an M Scaler. You can do the same with the Qutest, but the chassis on the M Scaler is designed to match the TT2 (I hope Chord comes out with a simpler M Scaler that matches the chassis of the Qutest ... and the price range). Of course, the chassis matching may not matter to you. If you sell your Qutest, you’re going to take a hit from what you paid for it, plus, the cost of a headphone amp and cables to connect the two. A little bit more clutter, but again, you may not care. You will likely spend less money this route and have more flexibility in the future for individual upgrades, but I know when I think this way, I tend to fiddle around with more upgrades meaning I end up spending more money. The TT2 gives you top tier performance in a compact design with a great headphone amp, remote control, Bluetooth, battery operation, and you’re likely going to be happy over the long haul, so less thoughts of upgrades. You should demo it, though, to make sure you like it’s tonality (you mention a darker sound is what you’re looking for, I presume the warmest filter on your Qutest is not doing it for you. By the way, I found mine to smooth out in the highs with extended play—400 hours—contrary to Chord’s position on burn-in).

Regarding the tube cost on a headphone amp, it depends what kind of tube circuit it is. If it’s like a Woo Audio that uses output tubes, 1,000 to 2,000 hours generally, at least in my experience. Depends on how hard they’re driven by the amp design, you may get even more hours than 2,000 if they’re not driven hard. My Luxman tube amp uses KT88s, and the design was to not push them to their full output capability so the tubes would last longer. My amp is 3 years old and I’m still on the original tubes.

Some amps use signal tubes instead of output tubes to flavor their sound, and those tubes can last 10,000 hours, again, in my experience. So the cost is not bad at all. Signal tubes can be had for $20-30 bucks a pair, but this can very greatly if you get involved with new old stock (NOS) tubes. These can be significantly more expensive if they are rare.

Whatever you decide, the quandary your in is an enviable one.


----------



## plsvn

would be nice to know if TT2 also performs "DSD decimation"
(only found out after buying it the Qutest does  )


----------



## OK-Guy

plsvn said:


> would be nice to know if TT2 also performs "DSD decimation"
> (only found out after buying it the Qutest does  )



TT2 will be the same as Dave and have 'native DSD', hth.


----------



## dac64

OK-Guy said:


> TT2 will be the same as Dave and have 'native DSD', hth.



It wouldn't matter any more if added on a HMS to Qutest.


----------



## OK-Guy

dac64 said:


> It wouldn't matter any more if added on a HMS to Qutest.



I best leave techy-questions to Rob, I tried but it's above my pay-grade... Rob's away at the mo but I daresay he'll advise me/answer on his return.


----------



## plsvn (Aug 16, 2018)

dac64 said:


> It wouldn't matter any more if added on a HMS to Qutest.



... Her Majesty Ship?


----------



## OK-Guy

plsvn said:


> Her Majesty Ship?



don't tempt me...


----------



## dac64 (Aug 16, 2018)

OK-Guy said:


> I best leave techy-questions to Rob, I tried but it's above my pay-grade... Rob's away at the mo but I daresay he'll advise me/answer on his return.



Rob said if one have a blu2, leave Dave to pcm+ all the time , he said DSD format will sound better this way!

Anyway, you are right because only my best guess on Qutest.


----------



## Rob Watts

plsvn said:


> would be nice to know if TT2 also performs "DSD decimation"
> (only found out after buying it the Qutest does  )



Yes it does; but the DSD decimation filter actually sounds a bit better than the DSD+ (non-decimating filter) - and the reason for this is the (potential) losses of decimation is outweighed by the improved RF noise suppression of the new DSD filter. I actually spent a huge amount of time on the new DSD filters - and the driver for this is the Davina ADC project, where I needed to establish whether decimation down to 16FS per se has any sound quality losses; and the answer was no, so long as the aliasing is kept to levels below -220 dB, which is the performance of the new DSD filter.


----------



## plsvn

Rob Watts said:


> but the DSD decimation filter actually sounds a bit better than the DSD+ (non-decimating filter)



which, I guess, is not the case with Qutest, right?
looks I'll have to wait for Dave2 (hoping it will do both, decimation and not, so user can decide  )


----------



## dac64

plsvn said:


> ...looks I'll have to wait for Dave2 (hoping it will do both, decimation and not, so user can decide  )



I've changed my mind, HMS direct to mono DX amp, no more Dave2


----------



## Nik74

I auditioned the Qutest today and am very impressed.I nearly bought it straight away but decided to sleep on it as I don't want to be too impulsive.
I heard it with a Linn streamer as source connected to the qutest via coax and then through to Sennheiser HDV820. I used my 800S 
I compared it to my Hugo 1 as I wasn't sure if the difference in SQ would be an upgrade or a sidegrade.
I was expecting subtle differences in favour of the Qutest and was surprised at how strikingly superior the Qutest is in some areas
Beyond the obvious -qutest more resolving, better at pinpoint imaging, vast  soundstage- things that really impressed me were: The reduced sibilance and smoother texture of the high frequencies in comparison to Hugo-I was expecting the opposite from what I ve read so far- and the clear  layering of musical lines, especially in orchestral music.It seemed to me that the Qutest is particularly insightful in terms of rhythm and flow, as if all the musical lines are organised in an even more involving and cohesive way than Hugo...Instrument separation is also greatly improved. Difficult to put in words what I heard but the step up was such that I thought that maybe there was something not right with the coax of Hugo. 
I wasn't sure how to volume match the two so I listened to the Qutest at a very slightly lower volume to make sure that I wasn't giving it an advantage.
Good bye £££...


----------



## musickid

Dawktah why not a hugo2/mscaler. It satisfies all requirements including relative cost?


----------



## dawktah2 (Aug 21, 2018)

musickid said:


> Dawktah why not a hugo2/mscaler. It satisfies all requirements including relative cost?



I'll take it into consideration, I just don't need another portable device. Also, in the back of my mind Western Electric re-introducing the 300B I think is going to trigger a whole new group of headphone amps.  I may buy a pair without even owning anything that uses 300B.


----------



## musickid

Whats so special about 300B?


----------



## AlexB73

I owned 300B reissue for 5 years. Nothing special!
I used TJ Mesh 300B and liked it even more.
Now I use EML Mash 300B and it is other level compared to TJ and 300B reissue.


----------



## dawktah2

musickid said:


> Whats so special about 300B?


----------



## Boogie7910

Difference in tonality and SQ between Qutest and Huggo TT?


----------



## dc71 (Aug 23, 2018)

I can't comment on relative differences between Qutest and TT, but I've now had Qutest in my system for over 3 months and have some feedback which some may find useful. Current system is NAS/Tidal/Spotify>Bluesound Node2>Qutest>Hegel H160>Quad S5 speakers.

I eventually ended up buying Qutest after going through a few DACs and being unsatisfied (NAD M51, DSpeaker Anti-mode2, Schiit Gumby). Gumby was the best of the rest, but its showstopper in my system was that the bass was too slow, causing the timing to sound 'off'. I guess this was a system/room matching issue since the Schiit DACs are known for good, full bass. My room has a 50hz mode of around 12db, and this probably contributed to the slow-sounding bass. The Qutest seems to exhibit more control of the bass especially overhang/stopping of notes, and is the first DAC to give full-sounding bass while not overly-exciting the mode in my room. Quite a feat, and it means that it's easily the best sounding DAC I've had in my system.

I fed it mostly from the Bluesound Node2. Differences between optical and coaxial cable seem very minor, although I feel that optical (QED Performance graphite) gives me a hair less organic warmth than the coaxial connection. I have ordered a Lifatec glass toslink to see if I can hear any improvement over the QED acrylic model.

I also tried an SoTM SMS-200 with stock power supply, feeding to Qutest USB input. SMS-200 gave a clear upgrade in sound quality over the Node2. Everything became more natural and dynamic, with richer tonal colours and a more convincing sense of realism and effortlessness. Exactly what I have been aiming for as my endgame, but the SMS-200 control was frustrating as I use NAS, Tidal and Spotify regularly, which required switching in the web interface, and it generally works much slower and more clunky than the fast and slick Node2/BluOS controller. I am now looking for the best of both worlds (sound quality and usability), so will try out Auralic Aries and maybe Pro-ject's new Stream Box S2 Ultra since their new control app is supposed to be good too. I'm expecting this to be the final step for me. I'll move the Bluesound to my less resolving second system once I get the better network transport.

Qutest is an excellent DAC and I feel like it has been a key piece of the jigsaw in my system, to move me towards my endgame sound. I don't know why there is such a clear difference between the transports, but in my system Qutest clearly responds to an improved source by showing better sound, so lower end streamers such as Node2, Arcam rPlay etc will not get the best out of it. Think minimum mRendu, SMS-200 or higher.


----------



## Bastianpp

hugo 2 and qutest sound the same?


----------



## iceanddice

dawktah2 said:


>




Sort of the same boat as you. Got the Qutest in my chain but waiting on the WE300B's for the Cayin HA-300... that or the PS Vane plus replica. -- but this Hugo MScaler is a must hear once its out. Gonna decide what to prioritize first after I audition.


----------



## sheldaze

Bastianpp said:


> hugo 2 and qutest sound the same?


 Yes and no. In my experience, the RCA output from the Hugo 2 sounded different from the RCA output (the only output) from the Qutest. While I enjoyed the direct headphone output from the Hugo 2, this was not the same "joy" I had when feeding Mojo into an amplifier or now Qutest into an amplifier. I have read since that the Mojo and Qutest output are more similar, while the Hugo 2 output has a topology difference.

I definitely enjoyed Mojo feeding a DNA Sonett 2 (now sold). And I enjoyed this same setup Qutest into Sonett 2. But during my brief time, with the Hugo 2 as a loaner, I did not enjoy it paired with any headphone amplifier I owned, including the Sonett 2. I much preferred Hugo 2 direct into headphones, and enjoyed this setup immensely.

To describe the difference I heard, I lack the words. Only I would expect a Sonett 2, which is a tube, to have a tube-like quality. It had less of this euphoric, laid-back quality when using the Hugo 2 as my source. Using the Qutest, I have no problems with any of my amplifiers. The tube quality of the Sonett 2 and a few others (using Massdrop ZDT Jr. these days) is quite clear, despite the Qutest source. Note also, I'm talking about very minor variance. But to answer your question, I have used Hugo 2 (loaner) and Qutest (I own this) via their RCA outputs. I heard a difference.


----------



## Sound Eq

hi everyone

i got myself the chord qutest and i hooked to my ifi ican pro amp, using decent audioquest tower rca, and I love this combo alot with my hifiman he x v2

https://www.audioquest.com/cables/analog-interconnects/bridges-falls-series/tower

I was wondering if using differnetrca will make noticeable difference in sound quality

another question I have, i am connecting the qutest to a regular usb hub that has 6 usb inputs, do u recommend certain usb hubs to connect to or does it not matter which usb hub I use


----------



## smodtactical

Dadbeh said:


> I HAVENT heard the cutest but the benchmark dac is can confirm that it is too hyped and it really does not sound that great. qutest would be my first choice to try.



Are you talking about Benchmark DAC 3?


----------



## smodtactical

zek4u said:


> I've been very impressed with the Sennheiser HDV 820's analog circuitry. Read that it has been improved. Well I'm running an LTA ZOTL 10 amplifier off of a headphone jack!  Sounds completely amazing with my Harbeth P3ESRs. Waiting for my XLR cables to arrive. Best of all worlds HD800S and P3s. I'm tempted to try a Benchmark DAC3 HGC but just have a feeling the Qutest with my HDV 820 or maybe a Pass Labs HPA-1 would be the ticket. I like amps such as the V281 and HDV 820 that run my HD800S headphones balanced over my Cardas cable. I know John Grandberg was using a Jeff Rowland Capri preamp in a Hugo review and he noticed a "subtle shift in tonal balance, where the presentation was simultaneously fuller and a bit darker up top." Would want something small for the desk where you wouldn't hear the difference between Qutest > headphone amp vs. Qutest> pre (pre-out) > headphone amp.
> 
> FYI. Thought the V280 sounded just the slightest more laid back then the V281. If my memory serves me right, HDV 820 sounds more transparent, has greater resolution with just as much macro dynamics as the V281. Nothing etched and wonderful transients. I can't wait to try a Qutest with my  HDV 820. Dave Hanson, you better be right. lol



This is good news and gives me hope since I just bought an HDV 820 which had some negative views on head fi.


----------



## Lodwales81

hello all, 
Had my qutest now around 2 months and still fiddling around with the settings. One question is that I find tidal cd quality streaming sounds better than all my digital high res music files 24 bit and dsd.is there a reason for this, dsd just sounds quiet and lifeless for me all my music is played through Audirvana plus.


----------



## Triode User

Lodwales81 said:


> hello all,
> Had my qutest now around 2 months and still fiddling around with the settings. One question is that I find tidal cd quality streaming sounds better than all my digital high res music files 24 bit and dsd.is there a reason for this, dsd just sounds quiet and lifeless for me all my music is played through Audirvana plus.



It might depend on what you regard as 'better'. Are you sure it is better really or is it just that you prefer it the sound of streamed Tidal? 

Do you stream through the same server that stores your hi res digital files and are you sure that they are proper hi res sources rather than merely upsampled?


----------



## Lodwales81

Triode User said:


> It might depend on what you regard as 'better'. Are you sure it is better really or is it just that you prefer it the sound of streamed Tidal?
> 
> Do you stream through the same server that stores your hi res digital files and are you sure that they are proper hi res sources rather than merely upsampled?


Thanks for reply  being doing a bit of research on dsd as most of my music files are pink floyd and the doors which I guess were never recorded and mastered in high res so at some point have been upsampled.


----------



## plsvn (Aug 25, 2018)

Lodwales81 said:


> Thanks for reply  being doing a bit of research on dsd as most of my music files are pink floyd and the doors which I guess were never recorded and mastered in high res so at some point have been upsampled.



issue only is with digital recordings (so post 'early 80'). anything before that was analogue and you can digitize it to whatever resolution you like: yes, even DSD
(then... quality of recording/mastering itself is a whole different issue, but that's true for any digital or analogue recording )


----------



## Triode User

Lodwales81 said:


> Thanks for reply  being doing a bit of research on dsd as most of my music files are pink floyd and the doors which I guess were never recorded and mastered in high res so at some point have been upsampled.



I wasn’t trying to make a point. Well not much of one. It’s just that since I became interested in the symptoms of RF noise in Blu2 I have realised that there are some people who actually prefer the music when it has the false detail and false sense of space created by the RF noise. At the end of the day it doesn’t really matter because if someone prefers one thing then that is the end of it no matter that technically it might not be correct.


----------



## Triode User

plsvn said:


> issue only is with digital recordings (so post 'early 80'). anything before that was analogue recording and you can remaster those tapes to anything you like: yes, even DSD



Yeah but sometimes they still just do a simple upscaling of the red book digital files rather than going back to the analogue tapes.


----------



## soares

Lodwales81 said:


> hello all,
> Had my qutest now around 2 months and still fiddling around with the settings. One question is that I find tidal cd quality streaming sounds better than all my digital high res music files 24 bit and dsd.is there a reason for this, dsd just sounds quiet and lifeless for me all my music is played through Audirvana plus.


I stream from the same server (STi5) + uR and the ripped files from CD do not sound as good as the ones through Tidal. This is frustating as I've got hundred of track that are not available on Tidal. Is it because they are stored in a USB Hard Disk? Shall I nuy a SSD to store the files. Will they sound better? Shall I buy  NAS? Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.


----------



## miketlse

soares said:


> I stream from the same server (STi5) + uR and the ripped files from CD do not sound as good as the ones through Tidal. This is frustating as I've got hundred of track that are not available on Tidal. Is it because they are stored in a USB Hard Disk? Shall I nuy a SSD to store the files. Will they sound better? Shall I buy  NAS? Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.


A good starting place is by understanding what do you mean by better?
I will start by using a simple example.
When I started using the Mojo, I used both the usb input and the optical input.
With optical the music/vocals was very clean and pure.
With usb the music was very clean and pure, but sounded slightly brighter. I added a ferrite choke to the usb cable, to remove any RFI that was being picked up, but some of the brightness still remained. That extra brightness was caused by the residual electrical noise from the computer internals, travelling through the usb cable, and entering the mojo internals.
Some people prefer the more realistic sound quality from using the optical input, but others prefer that false brightness created via the residual electrical noise.
There is no right or wrong answer, because so much depends on peoples preferences.

It is possible that there is little that you can do, to reduce any residual electrical noise from your server, reaching your dac.
However there is a simple experiment that you could try. Some owners who only have usb outputs on their computer, buy a usb to optical converter from amazon, and use that to discover if they prefer the sound, when using the optical input.
Little explorations like that, can help owners understand what they want to achieve, and possibly steer their route to achieve it.
It is certainly cheaper than rushing out and immediately buying SSD drives.


----------



## smodtactical

How does Qutest compare to Yggy 2? I searched on the forums but didn't find very many direct comparisons.


----------



## x RELIC x

soares said:


> I stream from the same server (STi5) + uR and the ripped files from CD do not sound as good as the ones through Tidal. This is frustating as I've got hundred of track that are not available on Tidal. Is it because they are stored in a USB Hard Disk? Shall I nuy a SSD to store the files. Will they sound better? Shall I buy  NAS? Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.



A lot of the difference may also be down to the mastering of the music. Many of the albums on Tidal are re-mastered to sound louder, but this also compresses the dynamic range. When comparing a wide dynamic range track (typically original older recordings pre 2000) to one that’s been re-mastered louder (with less dynamic range) the louder one usually sounds ‘better’ initially because that’s how humans are wired. Now, take an older track that isn’t mastered loud and increase the volume a little and the impact, nuance, and dynamics becomes MUCH more enjoyable.

Just a thought. Also, as mentioned, it would be very helpful if you described ‘better’.


----------



## Lodwales81

x RELIC x said:


> A lot of the difference may also be down to the mastering of the music. Many of the albums on Tidal are re-mastered to sound louder, but this also compresses the dynamic range. When comparing a wide dynamic range track (typically original older recordings pre 2000) to one that’s been re-mastered louder (with less dynamic range) the louder one usually sounds ‘better’ initially because that’s how humans are wired. Now, take an older track that isn’t mastered loud and increase the volume a little and the impact, nuance, and dynamics becomes MUCH more enjoyable.
> 
> Just a thought. Also, as mentioned, it would be very helpful if you described ‘better’.


Tidal music is louder but also seems to have more ambient and space to it and picks up on the bass more than my hi res music stored on my ssd


----------



## x RELIC x (Aug 25, 2018)

Lodwales81 said:


> Tidal music is louder but also seems to have more ambient and space to it and picks up on the bass more than my hi res music stored on my ssd



Is it similar to the differences hear in this example? Again, just thinking out loud here.


----------



## soares (Aug 25, 2018)

miketlse said:


> A good starting place is by understanding what do you mean by better?
> I will start by using a simple example.
> When I started using the Mojo, I used both the usb input and the optical input.
> With optical the music/vocals was very clean and pure.
> ...



Thank you so much for your input but all my system was optimised for USB. A friend of mine lend me a spidif converter about the same price of an SSD and it's miles away of the sound quality I have. Also I did try dozens of Albuns and there isn't a single one that it is bettered by the USB hard disk. So I am quite sure that this is not related to some remaster from Tidal... As what concerns the definifion of better, unfortunately my English it is not up to the task. It is a kind of veil that disappears when using Tidal. It is the same when you upgrade your DAC...


----------



## DjBobby

Lodwales81 said:


> Tidal music is louder but also seems to have more ambient and space to it and picks up on the bass more than my hi res music stored on my ssd


Tidal has raised the volume level recently and is playing much louder than ever before. I used to spent some time, a year or two ago, comparing Tidal's sound quality with my hi-rez flac rips, but at the moment the loudness difference is too significant to make any comparison without careful level matching. As I understand they use now by default the loudness normalization. 
It is like using high gain - louder might mislead to sounding "better".


----------



## jwbrent

I’ve been looking for a data USB cable to connect my MacBook Air which I use as my music server to my Qutest. Since they are very close to each other, I really only wanted a 6-8” cable, and I was strongly considering a Curious USB since they make an 8” version for a bit over $100.

I kept holding back for another option, and I saw that Penon Audio makes exactly what I need using pure silver conductors—6” long—for about $40, so I ordered it. I had purchased a Penon micro to micro with the same pure silver conductors for my 240SS to Mojo hookup, and it works great and is well made.

Thought I’d share the news for anyone else looking for a similar solution.


----------



## jwbrent




----------



## schneller

smodtactical said:


> How does Qutest compare to Yggy 2? I searched on the forums but didn't find very many direct comparisons.



I too would like to know impressions. Especially SE vs. SE and SE vs. XLR>SE. Paging @sheldaze ?


----------



## Rhamnetin

jwbrent said:


> I’ve been looking for a data USB cable to connect my MacBook Air which I use as my music server to my Qutest. Since they are very close to each other, I really only wanted a 6-8” cable, and I was strongly considering a Curious USB since they make an 8” version for a bit over $100.
> 
> I kept holding back for another option, and I saw that Penon Audio makes exactly what I need using pure silver conductors—6” long—for about $40, so I ordered it. I had purchased a Penon micro to micro with the same pure silver conductors for my 240SS to Mojo hookup, and it works great and is well made.
> 
> Thought I’d share the news for anyone else looking for a similar solution.



Seems oddly cheap considering the price of silver.


----------



## miketlse

Rhamnetin said:


> Seems oddly cheap considering the price of silver.


I thought that as well. Must be very thin wire.


----------



## jwbrent

Rhamnetin said:


> Seems oddly cheap considering the price of silver.



It’s made in China. Even some of the US finished cable suppliers source its cable from China. It’s 6” long, not a lot of cost for materials.


----------



## jwbrent

miketlse said:


> I thought that as well. Must be very thin wire.



Twelve x 27awg conductors.


----------



## plsvn

extra for optional silver signal path wiring on my Don Garber 2A3 "X" amplifier was $20. Fully american and handmade


----------



## jwbrent

schneller said:


> I too would like to know impressions. Especially SE vs. SE and SE vs. XLR>SE. Paging @sheldaze ?



Before I bought my Qutest, I considered the latest version of the Yggy. There were a few things that led to me choosing the Qutest: first, no native DSD with the Yggy; second, there are audible noises at the beginning of each track of an album, or at least that’s what I read on the Shiit website; third, having owned two Chord DACs before, I trust the technical prowess of Rob Watts. Your mileage may vary ...


----------



## jwbrent

plsvn said:


> extra for optional silver signal path wiring on my Don Garber 2A3 "X" amplifier was $20. Fully american and handmade



Great! The wire and connectors are generally the least expensive component of a cable; it’s the labor to put it all together that can cost more.

I was the Director of Sales for an American cable company many years ago, and I learned quite a bit about the business end.

Anyway, some won’t be interested in an inexpensive solution while others will ... my post was for the latter of the two.


----------



## ouchia

Trying to find a comparison between the Qutest and Hugo 2 sound-wise. Anyone a-b these two and have an opinion?


----------



## plinth

ouchia said:


> Trying to find a comparison between the Qutest and Hugo 2 sound-wise. Anyone a-b these two and have an opinion?


I own both and I cannot hear any difference at all. Both are fantastic and the Hugo2 tends to travel long haul with me to feed my Shure KSE1500. The rest of the time they both feed identical Stax systems:

Uptone LPS 1.2 power supply into Sonore Ultra rendu into Qutest or Hugo 2 into a Mjölnir Audio KGSSHV Carbon into Stax SR-007 mk2


----------



## ctrlm

I'm going to audition a Qutest on Wednesday. 

I'm curious about the BNC connectors....from most of the pics I've seen they look like 50 Ohm & not 75 Ohm. Can anyone confirm that?


----------



## plinth

I have 75 Ohm connected to my 2 BNC inputs


----------



## Triode User

ctrlm said:


> I'm going to audition a Qutest on Wednesday.
> 
> I'm curious about the BNC connectors....from most of the pics I've seen they look like 50 Ohm & not 75 Ohm. Can anyone confirm that?



They are 75 ohm. Some people have incorrectly posted pictures of 50 ohm connectors which are meant to be compatible ie they should fit but not all do.


----------



## Zzt231gr

ctrlm said:


> I'm going to audition a Qutest on Wednesday.
> 
> I'm curious about the BNC connectors....from most of the pics I've seen they look like 50 Ohm & not 75 Ohm. Can anyone confirm that?


75Ω for shure.


----------



## ctrlm

Thanks! There are a lot of differing opinions out there about using 50 Ohm BNC inputs for 75 Ohm cables and connectors....ranging from negligible impact to 5% signal loss. Who knows what to believe?

I've seen 50 Ohm connectors used on DACs before and wondered why a manufacturer would do it when they surely cost the same.

Anyway, all good. I'm looking forward to checking this baby out


----------



## dawktah2

I'm still kicking myself I used to have a bunch of bulk 75 Ohm from early cable tv days.


----------



## ctrlm (Sep 5, 2018)

Well I had a look at the Qutest in person today and those BNC inputs are definitely 50 Ohm to my eye with the thick dialectic around the centre pin. As I said, I am not sure what difference it makes in the world of Audio Nervosa, yes a 75 Ohm male connection will go on it fine but I'm just not sure why 50 Ohm would be installed instead of 75 Ohm? Perhaps it just offers more flexibility?

Anyway, there was a demo unit there that the store offered to let me take home for a couple of nights but not until next week as someone had already reserved it for a demo. There was however a demo Hugo 2 that they generously let me take home to audition based on the presumption that it would sound exactly the same. So she's hooked up and doing her thing as I type.


----------



## Ludique

About BNC connector impedance, see point nr 3:

https://www.belden.com/blog/digital-building/13-common-bnc-connector-installation-mistakes


----------



## Lodwales81

Hello all, a the the moment I'm using my mac book pro via USB connected to my qutest. I'm seeing to good reviews regarding the allo digione spdif box, would this be a upgrade from my mac.


----------



## Baten

Lodwales81 said:


> Hello all, a the the moment I'm using my mac book pro via USB connected to my qutest. I'm seeing to good reviews regarding the allo digione spdif box, would this be a upgrade from my mac.



I considered the Allo but got this instead

DIYinhk XMOS 192kHz high-quality USB to SPDIF with ultralow noise 1uV regulator

So far satisfied for sure. Very low noise usb>spdif device.


----------



## Lodwales81

Baten said:


> I considered the Allo but got this instead
> 
> DIYinhk XMOS 192kHz high-quality USB to SPDIF with ultralow noise 1uV regulator
> 
> So far satisfied for sure. Very low noise usb>spdif device.


I'm in the UK so that may be expensive to ship in, anybody tried a *Singxer SU-1 USB they seem to have great reviews but are around £300. I had a schiit eitr but recently sold it as no difference between USB and spdif. *


----------



## Baten

Lodwales81 said:


> I'm in the UK so that may be expensive to ship in, anybody tried a *Singxer SU-1 USB they seem to have great reviews but are around £300. I had a schiit eitr but recently sold it as no difference between USB and spdif. *



The Eitr is a decent device. If it made no difference I would not invest further in these devices honestly, seems like a waste of your time and money.


----------



## dac64 (Sep 11, 2018)

I used a 4" USB cable from windows 10 notebook with or without battery powered to the Qutest via jplay mini, sounded good!


----------



## Lodwales81

To be honest I want to replace my mac book pro with a streaming device that offers a good audio signal but don't want to spend ££££s maybe a sotm mini etc.


----------



## soares (Sep 11, 2018)

I changed my Macbook for a streaming device. A sonic transporter i5. To be honest I do not regret for the convenience. But on sound grounds it was more or less the same because at the same time I also got a Microrendu and later on a Ultrarendu. These devices as well as the sms 200 ultra really had a significant impact on the SQ. So if you want to have a better sound that's the advice I give you. To take full advantage of using this devices you will also need a good LPS. I have had good experiences with ultracaps LPS1 (there's a new model LPS2) or a Sbooster (the new models just arrive on the market). Cheers


----------



## Whazzzup (Sep 11, 2018)

Lodwales81 said:


> To be honest I want to replace my mac book pro with a streaming device that offers a good audio signal but don't want to spend ££££s maybe a sotm mini etc.


 sorry, thought it was a Dave thread


----------



## soares

Thís a Qutest forum and I was only trying to help an audiophile fellow to extract all the juice he can from a Quest. I own one. Cheers


----------



## Lodwales81

soares said:


> I changed my Macbook for a streaming device. A sonic transporter i5. To be honest I do not regret for the convenience. But on sound grounds it was more or less the same because at the same time I also got a Microrendu and later on a Ultrarendu. This devices as well as the sms 200 ultra really had a significant impact on the SQ. So if you want to have a better sound that's the advice I give you. To take full advantage of using this devices you will also need a good LPS. I have had good experiences with ultracaps LPS1 (there's a new model LPS2) or a Sbooster (the new models just arrive on the market). Cheers


Did you go with USB audio output or upgrade to optical or bnc


----------



## soares

Lodwales81 said:


> Did you go with USB audio output or upgrade to optical or bnc


USB audio. I do not exclude that optical or 2nd might be best but I never had the opportunity or wish to compare as I prefer the upsampling from HQPLAYER than the one from the Qutest. That might change with the Mscaler.  In any case, the guys from sonore sell an interface with an I2S output if I am not wrong.
 Of course it's not compatible with the Qutest.


----------



## Nik74 (Sep 15, 2018)

I took the plunge and finally got my Qutest. It's been playing for about 4 hours so far. It sounds stunning.It's sense of rhythm is amazing, dynamics aplenty, excellent layering ,  detail retrieval, instrument separation etc. And so musically engaging!. treble is a bit glary at the moment, mids slightly more forward than Hugo 1, soundstage depth less cavernous than Hugo, I m sensing that these might shift with burn in.Loving it so far


----------



## Ronsanut

Same here. I have mine running through a HeadAmp GS-X MkII.  Loving it !


----------



## jwbrent

Nik74 said:


> I took the plunge and finally got my Qutest. It's been playing for about 4 hours so far. It sounds stunning.It's sense of rhythm is amazing, dynamics aplenty, excellent layering ,  detail retrieval, instrument separation etc. And so musically engaging!. treble is a bit glary at the moment, mids slightly more forward than Hugo 1, soundstage depth less cavernous than Hugo, I m sensing that these might shift with burn in.Loving it so far



You are correct in your assessment about the change in sound with more play time.


----------



## azabu

If anyone has HQPlayer, try the new PCM closed-form-M filter.

It's utterly jaw dropping and takes the Qutest to the next level.


----------



## maxh22

azabu said:


> If anyone has HQPlayer, try the new PCM closed-form-M filter.
> 
> It's utterly jaw dropping and takes the Qutest to the next level.



I’m afraid that title is reserved only to the M Scaler, I’ve heard HQ Player before with my TT and Mojo and every time it’s only sounded worse or different at best!


----------



## azabu

maxh22 said:


> I’m afraid that title is reserved only to the M Scaler, I’ve heard HQ Player before with my TT and Mojo and every time it’s only sounded worse or different at best!



These are new (there are a few more filters) and should satisfy until the Qutest m scaler is released.


----------



## Triode User

azabu said:


> These are new (there are a few more filters) and should satisfy until the Qutest m scaler is released.



Well the Qutest MScaler in the form of the Hugo MScaler intended to be used with the Qutest is released. I have one. See over on the MScaler thread for pictures and thoughts.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hug...-official-thread.885042/page-82#post-14485215


----------



## Lodwales81

azabu said:


> If anyone has HQPlayer, try the new PCM closed-form-M filter.
> 
> It's utterly jaw dropping and takes the Qutest to the next level.


Interesting to hear but I though music should be sent direct to the qutest for best audio quality rather than software unsampling (that is the response I received regarding  audirvana unsampling)


----------



## azabu

Lodwales81 said:


> Interesting to hear but I though music should be sent direct to the qutest for best audio quality rather than software unsampling (that is the response I received regarding  audirvana unsampling)



I'd say give it a try, you can download the free trial software.

I'll definitely be getting the m scaler that matches the Qutest price wise.


----------



## dac64

I am curious to know what is the lowest AC polarity of your Qutest. Mine is AC 77.2V.

https://www.gcaudio.com/tips-tricks/determining-proper-ac-polarity/


----------



## Nik74

Break in skeptics look away, trigger alert:

So now my Qutest has been in operation close to 48 hours. I listened through it for the first 6 on Saturday - who needs a social life - and then for an hour last night. Then had a chance to spend another hour with it today lunchtime. The three things I didn’t like about it have by now completely shifted away. 
I am absolutely certain that this isn’t my ears and brain recalibrating as I m getting used to a new sonic  signature. This recalibration definitely occurred in the past as I was getting used to my 800S over a few months to a degree that didn’t allow me to say with certainty if it was me or the headphones burning in. 
This time the sonic shifts are night and day differences that occurred through these two days. 

So: treble on Saturday eve was almost what I would define as harsh, bright and glary, unforgiving even in more or less decent in that respect material. Last night noticeably less, there was still some digital glare over what sounded like a much more varied tonal palette . This afternoon that glare has given way to a smoothness that was a joy to listen to even in recordings that are usually almost unbearable in that respect. 

The somehow in your face mids have relaxed allowing even more musical flow and voices have opened up. This was even more of a relief 

Lastly the sense of depth of stage is now there, even more holographic and uncoloured than with Hugo 1.

I can’t stress enough that these are not subtle differences but a definite shift. 

Bits may be bits but they really like taps ....


----------



## dawktah2 (Sep 17, 2018)

dac64 said:


> I am curious to know what is the lowest AC polarity of your Qutest. Mine is AC 77.2V.
> 
> https://www.gcaudio.com/tips-tricks/determining-proper-ac-polarity/



4. Connect the common probe of the Multimeter (black lead) to a ground reference point*. I If you have a three-wire grounded receptacles, use the center pin.​
I noticed you are holding the black probe. Interesting article. I have done some of the inside wiring in our house so I know the hot and neutral go back to the panel correctly.  Our outlets are Lutron polarized so this will be an interesting experiment.


----------



## dawktah2

I used my Fluke T5-1000 and in orientation I have it in normally 78v.  Flipped upside down read 79v


----------



## dac64 (Sep 17, 2018)

dawktah2 said:


> I used my Fluke T5-1000 and in orientation I have it in normally 78v.  Flipped upside down read 79v



Thanks for the follow up! So, the reading was a norm. And, I've forgotten the actual steps. 

I got 78V vs 80V, on the second try. By accident, the Qutest was connected to the lowest reading from day one.

From my experiences, once all the equipment were configured to the lowest readings, the music background became very quiet and peaceful, or darker background, and very coherence.

Anyway, the Qutest was very revealing in my system, it could describe the characteristics of each and every recording. It's really a good buy at this price point.


----------



## smodtactical

Anyone compare qutest to ps DirectStream


----------



## VintageFlanker (Sep 18, 2018)

Also interested about Qutest vs ADI-2 DAC or any Audio-GD around 1k$ (unbalanced).

There is a comparison on SABF. Thing is, I have some reservations as all dac on this forum are constantly inferior...to the competitor from Schitt...


----------



## Rivendell

Ok, i started reading this lot i dont know how long ago.

So i bought a Chord EX

Then stuck an LPS on it

And then things changed

Oh, this is nice, this is tasty!

BUT,  2 WEEKS , 2 bloody weeks after i bought it,Chord launched the Qutest. Bugger !!! (apologies) 

As for the EX with the LPS - very impressive, better with than without imo

So Back and forth i went, do i think is it worth it ! 

May, June, more thinking, more pondering, some paceing to and fro.

July more paceing, more thinking and some pondering

August, as detailed above pretty much but with a change of footwear. 

Fair enough, flippers in the lounge!, its a stretch for anybody she cried!  It helps me think i pace/cudunkin (thats not even a word).

So September arrives , bugger bugger bugger i cant take it anymore, so on september 7, i got one.

Im using this with a ming da campana integrated valve amp and and tannoys prescision 6.4 speakers

Report (lol) this is the whole point of the post! 

75hrs on it. Blimey what a change

1st 4hrs - yuck.rough and toppy
About 20 hrs noticed a change, just kinda got its act together for want of a better word from there its just opened up and got better

Stunning midrange deatil
Digging very deep into the tracks (you think you know them inside out then, whazzat!)
The brittle top end is gone, its lovely
The bass taut and can go very very low when required with no wobble

The up and down of it is that its a lovely lovely thing both to look at (its a black brick, how sad am i? ), very well built, and sounds the business. 

What can i say but ive read after 300hrs it comes alive. (Im like the undead as it stands 75hrs in and matchsticks have been snapped already,!)

Sadly i take burn in very seriously, like a duty or something, its to do with to much valve burning in probably, lol, ive a book for my valve burn in stuff and ive written it in there for godness sake, its documented)

Oh, and the packaging and box is befitting of the product. Im a sucker for a nice box!

Without opening a can of worms, with or without an lps?

Lol

For anyonewho hasnt, Teardrop by Massive Attack and  Bugs by Lamchop should tell you all you need to know.

Loving it


----------



## dac64

Rivendell said:


> Ok, i started reading this lot i dont know how long ago.
> 
> So i bought a Chord EX
> 
> ...



What dac are you  talking about?


----------



## plsvn

dac64 said:


> What dac are you talking about?





Rivendell said:


> BUT, 2 WEEKS , 2 bloody weeks after i bought it,Chord launched the Qutest. Bugger !!! (apologies)


----------



## dac64

plsvn said:


>



Is he day job a politician?


----------



## Sound Eq

how do u turn the qutest off, or is supposed to be always on


----------



## dawktah2

Sound Eq said:


> how do u turn the qutest off, or is supposed to be always on



Always on


----------



## veeceeem

I just bought Qutest yesterday. Try to compare it to my Schiit Yggdrasil Analog2.
To me and my brother, Qutest is better sounding, soundstage is more expanding (very noticable), human voice sounds more lifelike. Only thing I don't like about Qutest is its bass impact, thou not bad, but not strong enough imo (worse than Yggy's bass, but even when not compared to anything, it still doesnt feel strong enough)

My system:
McIntosh MA6700
Sonus Faber Venere S
Qutest uses neutral profile with 2V output
Yggy uses XLR output


----------



## Zzt231gr

veeceeem said:


> I just bought Qutest yesterday. Try to compare it to my Schiit Yggdrasil Analog2.
> To me and my brother, Qutest is better sounding, soundstage is more expanding (very noticable), human voice sounds more lifelike. Only thing I don't like about Qutest is its bass impact, thou not bad, but not strong enough imo (worse than Yggy's bass, but even when not compared to anything, it still doesnt feel strong enough)
> 
> My system:
> ...


I dare to say that Qutest is neutral in bass quantity-not lean.

Maybe you should reposition your speakers a bit?


----------



## Rob Watts

Good advice. It's easy for DAC designers to create more perceived weight on the bottom end by adding distortion and other mechanisms; but this suppress' variation and pitch definition. Quality, not perceived quantity...


----------



## veeceeem (Sep 21, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Good advice. It's easy for DAC designers to create more perceived weight on the bottom end by adding distortion and other mechanisms; but this suppress' variation and pitch definition. Quality, not perceived quantity...





Zzt231gr said:


> I dare to say that Qutest is neutral in bass quantity-not lean.
> 
> Maybe you should reposition your speakers a bit?


I'll do more experiments with speaker placement later.
Good thing is that I did clearly hear/feel "layers" of bass with Qutest and pretty impressed by that. (no clue if "layers" is the right word to describe it, but I did hear it, and it felt good, I also think that's how bass should sound/feel like)
I'll do more hearing with Qutest, but I have to admit that it make me want to listen to music more than Yggy.
Too soon to conclude, but if I have to pick one out of 2, I'll pick the Qutest, for sure.


----------



## dac64 (Sep 21, 2018)

veeceeem said:


> Qutest uses neutral profile with 2V output
> Yggy uses XLR output



What is the XLR output of Yggy?


----------



## veeceeem

dac64 said:


> What is the XLR output of Yggy?


I don't really understand your question, but I connect Yggy to MA6700 using XLR cables. No real difference between XLR and RCA so I stick to XLR.


----------



## dac64

veeceeem said:


> I don't really understand your question, but I connect Yggy to MA6700 using XLR cables. No real difference between XLR and RCA so I stick to XLR.



The RCA output of the Qutest is 2V.
What is the XLR output of Yggy?


----------



## veeceeem

dac64 said:


> The RCA output of the Qutest is 2V.
> What is the XLR output of Yggy?


It's stated in its website.


----------



## VintageFlanker

dac64 said:


> What is the XLR output of Yggy?


4.0V RMS


----------



## veeceeem

I'm listening more and more to Qutest, at this point I'm very convinced by how it produces human voices, it feels superb to listen to just voices in any songs.
Instrument separation and soundstage are  also very good.
Omg, I can't express how good human voices are with Qutest, I can really feel the emotions/vibarations in voices. 
Btw, still havent had time to adjust speakers, so things could be improved even more!


----------



## dac64

VintageFlanker said:


> 4.0V RMS



Thanks for the info! It's handy for me to post my thought!

As I suspected, I believe some were having the same thinking. It's not a apple-to-apple comparison, as good as comparing the 1v, 2v and 3v outputs of Qutest itself.

If I were to do the comparison, I'll measure the amp speaker outputs, to ensure both dac have the similar output from the amp.


----------



## x RELIC x

dac64 said:


> Thanks for the info! It's handy for me to post my thought!
> 
> As I suspected, I believe some were having the same thinking. It's not a apple-to-apple comparison, as good as comparing the 1v, 2v and 3v outputs of Qutest itself.
> 
> If I were to do the comparison, I'll measure the amp speaker outputs, to ensure both dac have the similar output from the amp.



Yes, you need to volume match to a very close tolerance for any meaningful comparison or else the slightly louder one will usually always sound better. It’s the way we humans are wired. Adjust the volume on the amp to compensate for the different Voltages from the DACs.


----------



## VintageFlanker

x RELIC x said:


> the slightly louder one will usually always sound better. It’s the way we humans are wired.


100% Agreed.
Thing is, in this case: the Qutest seems to sound better than the Yggy V2 despite the fact it is still louder in perception, anyway...
Conclusion: looks like the Qutest is a stellar DAC at the end.


----------



## naynay

Hi,
Thinking of adding the Curious USB cable and would like to know where best to connect this.
Which would give me most improvement if any,connecting from SSD to Auralic Femto Streamer USB connection or from Auralic Femto Streamer to Qutest Dac USB connection?
Thanks


----------



## veeceeem (Sep 22, 2018)

VintageFlanker said:


> 100% Agreed.
> Thing is, in this case: the Qutest seems to sound better than the Yggy V2 despite the fact it is still louder in perception, anyway...
> Conclusion: looks like the Qutest is a stellar DAC at the end.


I only had 1 hour to listen to the Qutest today. But I was so impressed by it.
I have been using YggyV2 for half a year or so, but I have always been disappointed by the amount of money I spent. (Emotionless sounding)
I wont go deeper into Qutest vs YggyV2, but would love to talk about what I find when listening to Qutest (comparing to YggyV2 ofcoz, cuz it's the other DAC I have)
---------------------
Instrument sounding: something to die for, so smooth to the ears, so natural that I seem to become numb during songs with alot of instruments being played.
Human sounding: when I listened to When you say nothing at all by Alison Krauss, I couldn't believe her voice could be that soft, natural, and beautiful. Her voice reached my chest then spread all over my body and I seemed to pass out on that 
Drum/bass: I love to play Through the Fire and Flames again to test how Qutest handle low, I was super impressed here, I could feel all the vibarations from the drums/low in that fast song, didnt miss a single beat. Cool!
I typed alot, mostly because of how disappointed Ive been since I bought YggyV2, I guess. It feels so empty and emotionless when listening to Yggy that I listen less since that day...


----------



## Northern Light

I am in the process of “ditching” my Naim ND5XS for a Qutest. Obviously I’ll need a transport for the Qutest. I now wonder whether it was better to use the Qutest’ USB input, or rather the S/PDIF (BNC) input. Does it make any difference? 

Cheers!


----------



## peter1480

Northern Light said:


> I am in the process of “ditching” my Naim ND5XS for a Qutest. Obviously I’ll need a transport for the Qutest. I now wonder whether it was better to use the Qutest’ USB input, or rather the S/PDIF (BNC) input. Does it make any difference?
> Cheers!



Why are you “ditching” your ND5XS? It's a very good front end for the Qutest.


----------



## Northern Light

peter1480 said:


> Why are you “ditching” your ND5XS? It's a very good front end for the Qutest.



The ND5XS doesn‘t support Qobuz, and I am also thinking about having a go with Roon once Qobuz is integrated — and again something Naim doesn‘t support with legacy streamers.


----------



## Nik74

I was wondering what analog interconnects you guys are using with your Qutest. I thought it wouldn't matter that much but by accident today I was reminded that it does. A lot...

I have a Goldmund Mimesis and a Van Der Hul Silver-MC IT Coaxial, - both are around 20 year old analog interconnect cables - the latter was forgotten in a box as it didn't fit the RCA of my Hugo. I ve had the Goldmund with the Hugo and when I got the Qutest I didn't even think about the other cable, I just fitted the Goldmund and rested my case. Today I had to use the Van Der Hul and it is surprising how different it sounds.I fact  I much prefer it  to the Goldmund. It sounds more balanced across the fq range , with a slightly warmer tonality. a bit more laid back too, less digital somehow ,equally as detailed but in a much more relaxed way, only drawback it feels like dynamics may be a little more restrained. I wonder if there is something that could bridge the tonalities of the 2...I m sure cable technology has advanced since I bought these cables , so any ideas?. Please don't bash me with 'cables sound the same','bits are bits' and the like, I ve crossed over to the other side


----------



## jwbrent

Nik74 said:


> I was wondering what analog interconnects you guys are using with your Qutest. I thought it wouldn't matter that much but by accident today I was reminded that it does. A lot...
> 
> I have a Goldmund Mimesis and a Van Der Hul Silver-MC IT Coaxial, - both are around 20 year old analog interconnect cables - the latter was forgotten in a box as it didn't fit the RCA of my Hugo. I ve had the Goldmund with the Hugo and when I got the Qutest I didn't even think about the other cable, I just fitted the Goldmund and rested my case. Today I had to use the Van Der Hul and it is surprising how different it sounds.I fact  I much prefer it  to the Goldmund. It sounds more balanced across the fq range , with a slightly warmer tonality. a bit more laid back too, less digital somehow ,equally as detailed but in a much more relaxed way, only drawback it feels like dynamics may be a little more restrained. I wonder if there is something that could bridge the tonalities of the 2...I m sure cable technology has advanced since I bought these cables , so any ideas?. Please don't bash me with 'cables sound the same','bits are bits' and the like, I ve crossed over to the other side



I use a Kimber KCAG which is pure silver. On my system, it works really well and I don’t find that it makes the sound brighter in any way, rather, there is greater detail retrieval.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> I was wondering what analog interconnects you guys are using with your Qutest. I thought it wouldn't matter that much but by accident today I was reminded that it does. A lot...
> 
> I have a Goldmund Mimesis and a Van Der Hul Silver-MC IT Coaxial, - both are around 20 year old analog interconnect cables - the latter was forgotten in a box as it didn't fit the RCA of my Hugo. I ve had the Goldmund with the Hugo and when I got the Qutest I didn't even think about the other cable, I just fitted the Goldmund and rested my case. Today I had to use the Van Der Hul and it is surprising how different it sounds.I fact  I much prefer it  to the Goldmund. It sounds more balanced across the fq range , with a slightly warmer tonality. a bit more laid back too, less digital somehow ,equally as detailed but in a much more relaxed way, only drawback it feels like dynamics may be a little more restrained. I wonder if there is something that could bridge the tonalities of the 2...I m sure cable technology has advanced since I bought these cables , so any ideas?. Please don't bash me with 'cables sound the same','bits are bits' and the like, I ve crossed over to the other side


Blue Jeans Cables are very good-no BS cables.And reasonably priced,too!


----------



## peter1480

Northern Light said:


> The ND5XS doesn‘t support Qobuz, and I am also thinking about having a go with Roon once Qobuz is integrated — and again something Naim doesn‘t support with legacy streamers.



I run Audirvana Plus (it streams Qobuz) on a Windows 10 i7 NUC SSD, music is on an Qnap NAS. Roon is a bit ott in my opinion. But I still use the ND5XS and have a N-DAC XPS as well as the Qutest. 2 different presentations of music via 282/250DR  into a Mjilnir 2 for phones listening.


----------



## 211276

I use NVA TIS.


----------



## Nejiro

Hello to all, I apologize if I use a translator, I wanted to ask you something about my Qutest, I had for several days a test Qutest from my retailer, connected to an intel Nuc in usb with Windows 10 and Foobar 1.4, every time I turned off the pc the Qutest was placed in a position that I would define stand-by, ie the porthole light was white and less strong, satisfied with the product I decided to take it and I got a new one packed, I left everything identical to how it was connected the other only that when I turn off the PC does not put on standby, remains on with the color of the light I was using, for example if I listen to a 24/96 pcm and turn off the PC the light remains green while instead with the other Qutest that I had under test the light was lowered and became white ....... according to you there is something wrong or I can always keep it lit in this way?
Thank you


----------



## dac64

I played redbook most of the times. The qutest show "red".

If I stop play, no colour. Yet to confirm tonight.


----------



## dac64

I had the mogami 2803 as interconnect for years. Very neutral sounding.

For those whom don't know 2803, Audience cable became famous and popular when they relabelled this cable.


----------



## dawktah2

Nejiro said:


> Hello to all, I apologize if I use a translator, I wanted to ask you something about my Qutest, I had for several days a test Qutest from my retailer, connected to an intel Nuc in usb with Windows 10 and Foobar 1.4, every time I turned off the pc the Qutest was placed in a position that I would define stand-by, ie the porthole light was white and less strong, satisfied with the product I decided to take it and I got a new one packed, I left everything identical to how it was connected the other only that when I turn off the PC does not put on standby, remains on with the color of the light I was using, for example if I listen to a 24/96 pcm and turn off the PC the light remains green while instead with the other Qutest that I had under test the light was lowered and became white ....... according to you there is something wrong or I can always keep it lit in this way?
> Thank you



Mine continues to play colors of last track played no dimming.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nejiro said:


> Hello to all, I apologize if I use a translator, I wanted to ask you something about my Qutest, I had for several days a test Qutest from my retailer, connected to an intel Nuc in usb with Windows 10 and Foobar 1.4, every time I turned off the pc the Qutest was placed in a position that I would define stand-by, ie the porthole light was white and less strong, satisfied with the product I decided to take it and I got a new one packed, I left everything identical to how it was connected the other only that when I turn off the PC does not put on standby, remains on with the color of the light I was using, for example if I listen to a 24/96 pcm and turn off the PC the light remains green while instead with the other Qutest that I had under test the light was lowered and became white ....... according to you there is something wrong or I can always keep it lit in this way?
> Thank you


The window light-when the input to the Qutest is off-has to do with the colour of the input and filter button.Try changing them and you'll see.


----------



## Nejiro

So let's say I do not have to worry about it if it does not go off like the other one, can it be on 24 hours even if the light of the last frequency heard remains?
Thanks


----------



## Nik74

I just looked throught the  round glass and while on but not receiving digital signal there are 5 led lights on inside. One each for the current input and filter that are white and three red ones. Nothing has changed now that I am streaming. Those three become green , blue etc when sample freq changes and their colour slightly tints the filter and input light colour if you are on incisive neutral and usb input- an effect I quite like ..I don't see why you would worry about it but yeah, if anyone has any input on what would be correct Qutest behaviour , do please shed a light


----------



## Nejiro

However, it was just to say that I had two Qutest in the house connected to the same PC and have different behavior, one goes off (so did my previous 2Qute) and one no ..... as I do not always the night off the current I asked if the dac could remain lit with the last color of the light reproduced instead of with low white light ....


----------



## Nik74

Nejiro said:


> However, it was just to say that I had two Qutest in the house connected to the same PC and have different behavior, one goes off (so did my previous 2Qute) and one no ..... as I do not always the night off the current I asked if the dac could remain lit with the last color of the light reproduced instead of with low white light ....



Understood, mine behaves in the same way, all I m saying is it doesn't worry me and I have had it on since I bought it but would like to know too if others think otherwise.I was just clarifying that there are 5 lights in the qutest that could be contributing to visible colour and they look different depending on how light or dark the room is


----------



## Ronsanut

Nejiro said:


> However, it was just to say that I had two Qutest in the house connected to the same PC and have different behavior, one goes off (so did my previous 2Qute) and one no ..... as I do not always the night off the current I asked if the dac could remain lit with the last color of the light reproduced instead of with low white light ....



My Qutest is configured to the Neutral Filter (White) and USB Input (White). I have upscaling configured through Roon so when my system is on and Roon is running my center window light turns to Blue.  When I turn my PC off, the window light changes to red/orange color.  The Filter and Input always stay White ( per my settings).  Mine has always operated like this.  Hope this helps.


----------



## Nejiro

Okay then, I leave it like that, you keep it always on or in the evening you turn it off?
About upsampling, with a program that would do upsampling pcm to 24/768 Are you okay, does it sound better?
Thank you


----------



## Ronsanut

I was using the Optical Input and then I learned that ROON a does upsampling if you use USB and use the Chord Qutest USB Driver. To me it does sound a bit fuller and little richer sound.  So yes it sounds better to my ears.


----------



## Rob Watts

The warmth is softness due to transients being out of alignment due to the comparatively crude up-sampling compared to Qutest's WTA filter. If you want a more accurate and much more musical sound, make sure the source is bit perfect, with no up-sampling.


----------



## dac64 (Sep 25, 2018)

Nejiro said:


> However, it was just to say that I had two Qutest in the house connected to the same PC and have different behavior, one goes off (so did my previous 2Qute) and one no ..... as I do not always the night off the current I asked if the dac could remain lit with the last color of the light reproduced instead of with low white light ....



My setting is neutral, USB input and redbook, so two white lights and one red.

Once i stopped playing, the red stay until I  powered down the source, and turned to white/red/blue.

The three lights went off once the source has powered up but before play.

And good to always leave the electronics on or standby mode except for class A power amp or tube gear.

The electronics will last longer in this way.


----------



## Ronsanut

Rob Watts said:


> The warmth is softness due to transients being out of alignment due to the comparatively crude up-sampling compared to Qutest's WTA filter. If you want a more accurate and much more musical sound, make sure the source is bit perfect, with no up-sampling.



Thank you Rob.  I will disable the ROON up-sampling and give it a listen again.  Since you were so kind to provide feedback on this, I understand your new M-Scaler does up-sampling, but I assume it does it significantly different than how it is applied in ROON.  Will adding the new M-Scaler to my Qutest make a significant improvement to the sound ?

My current setups are :
Tidal & FLAC Server Files via ROON on PC (usb or optical) > Qutest > GS-X MkII > Utopia / HD-800 / LCD 2 Classic.
Tidal & FLAC Server Files via ROON on PC (usb or optical) > Qutest > Blue Hawaii > SR-009 / Lambda L700

Regards.
Ron


----------



## jwbrent

Nejiro said:


> Hello to all, I apologize if I use a translator, I wanted to ask you something about my Qutest, I had for several days a test Qutest from my retailer, connected to an intel Nuc in usb with Windows 10 and Foobar 1.4, every time I turned off the pc the Qutest was placed in a position that I would define stand-by, ie the porthole light was white and less strong, satisfied with the product I decided to take it and I got a new one packed, I left everything identical to how it was connected the other only that when I turn off the PC does not put on standby, remains on with the color of the light I was using, for example if I listen to a 24/96 pcm and turn off the PC the light remains green while instead with the other Qutest that I had under test the light was lowered and became white ....... according to you there is something wrong or I can always keep it lit in this way?
> Thank you



Yes, mine remains on the color of the corresponding music file last played. Perhaps your dealer had an early version Qutest that worked differently.


----------



## jwbrent

... or maybe I have an early version Qutest and the latest production works differently.


----------



## plsvn

... or maybe it all depends on how the source handles the signal when playback stops 
here, Qutest connected to an Audiophilleo, dims all lights 15 minutes after playback stops whilst, connected to an Auralic Aries mini... all light stay on


----------



## Nejiro

jwbrent said:


> Yes, mine remains on the color of the corresponding music file last played. Perhaps your dealer had an early version Qutest that worked differently.



In fact, the Qutest I have now has a higher serial number but I do not think that Chord did any updates ... ... you should ask them ...
Anyway beyond this, I am very satisfied with this dac ......


----------



## Nejiro (Sep 25, 2018)

plsvn said:


> ... or maybe it all depends on how the source handles the signal when playback stops
> here, Qutest connected to an Audiophilleo, dims all lights 15 minutes after playback stops whilst, connected to an Auralic Aries mini... all light stay on



My I have connected in the same PC to which the other was connected, I did not do anything, everything remained as it was, the first each time attenuated the light and became white, with this does not attenuate and remains the same color of the last frequency heard ......Important however is that it is not a malfunction and that nothing happens if I leave it on even with strong light .......


----------



## boxerlc

I stopped using hqplayer after comparison with bit perfect . It seems like micro details are removed from the signal by hqplayer, the audio comes out is very smooth and clean, but seems a little dull.


----------



## jwbrent

Nejiro said:


> In fact, the Qutest I have now has a higher serial number but I do not think that Chord did any updates ... ... you should ask them ...
> Anyway beyond this, I am very satisfied with this dac ......



Yes, I’m extremely happy with my purchase. I hope Chord can come up with a scaled down version of the M Scaler that perfectly matches the Qutest sometime in the future. For now, I just listen to the music and smile.


----------



## jwbrent

plsvn said:


> ... or maybe it all depends on how the source handles the signal when playback stops
> here, Qutest connected to an Audiophilleo, dims all lights 15 minutes after playback stops whilst, connected to an Auralic Aries mini... all light stay on



Good point.


----------



## Nejiro

Who has tried the M-Scaler is it satisfied? It really increases the quality? I dsd resampled them all in pcm 24/768? I'd like to try it but I can not afford it as too expensive for my chances ....


----------



## dac64

Nejiro said:


> Who has tried the M-Scaler is it satisfied? It really increases the quality? I dsd resampled them all in pcm 24/768? I'd like to try it but I can not afford it as too expensive for my chances ....



https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.831345/page-956#post-14503178


----------



## dac64

Ronsanut said:


> Thank you Rob.  I will disable the ROON up-sampling...



https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.831345/page-956#post-14503178


----------



## dac64

A so so feedback. However the different between the two users is 40. 

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hug...lectronics-the-official-thread.885042/page-94


----------



## AndrewOld (Sep 29, 2018)

There is a rather critical review of the Qutest, or at least the supplied power supply, in the months HiFi News. Specifically Paul Miller who did the technical review and measurements says:

“I will very rarely suggest upgrading a part the moment you have bought it but, if the 5V/2A switch-mode wall wart supplied here is indicative, then replacing it with a superior USB charger will surely reap subjective benefits. The supplied charger suffused the Qutest with sufficient switching noise and other interference that it proved impossible to realise it’s true technical potential. So I tested the Qutest with my (Oppo) smartphone charger instead, ridding the DAC’s output of spurious noise.”

Paul Miller HiFi News November 2018

Keith Howard, who did the subjective review of a different sample, said

“With Chord’s provided supply the sound was OK but lacking the beguiling insight and naturalness I was expecting from my many years enjoying the QuteHD. Swapping to iFiAudios supply fixed that, with Sinatra’s voice now oozing character .... “

Keith Howard HiFi News November 2018

Anyone care to comment? Might there be issues with Chord’s SMPS’s?

Understand that once the perceived  power supply issues were resolved, this was an incredibly favourable and enthusiastic review, both technically and subjectively.


----------



## miketlse

AndrewOld said:


> There is a rather critical review of the Qutest, or at least the supplied power supply, in the months HiFi News. Specifically Paul Miller who did the technical review and measurements says:
> 
> “I will very rarely suggest upgrading a part the moment you have bought it but, if the 5V/2A switch-mode wall wart supplied here is indicative, then replacing it with a superior USB charger will surely reap subjective benefits. The supplied charger suffused the Qutest with sufficient switching noise and other interference that it proved impossible to realise it’s true technical potential. So I tested the Qutest with my (Oppo) smartphone charger instead, ridding the DAC’s output of spurious noise.”
> 
> ...


I don't know how you arrive at incredibly favourable? He seemed to dislike several aspects such as the case, the use of balls for control, the inclusion of filters, and preferred other Chord dacs. I was quite surprised by the overall tone of the review - almost as if he got up on the wrong side of bed that morning.


----------



## AndrewOld

miketlse said:


> I don't know how you arrive at incredibly favourable? He seemed to dislike several aspects such as the case, the use of balls for control, the inclusion of filters, and preferred other Chord dacs. I was quite surprised by the overall tone of the review - almost as if he got up on the wrong side of bed that morning.



Well the criticisms of the case and light balls are not unreasonable - I’ve got an MScaler and haven’t a clue what the colours mean unless I look in the manual that they don’t put in the box - but in terms of sound quality he said he thought it was a few important steps beyond the his own QuteHD which was the best DAC he’s heard under £3k, and concludes “this is a DAC for those that relish the clarity and impact which the best digital audio can deliver, particularly when it makes music revelatory.” so I would say that is incredibly favourable in terms of sound quality.  But those remarks only apply to when a different power supply to the one supplied was used, so I think it is reasonable to wonder what was going on with the review power supplies that they seem to measure badly and sound bad. Was there an issue? Have Chord checked the review samples? Are other products affected? Paul Miller is well respected.


----------



## jwbrent

AndrewOld said:


> There is a rather critical review of the Qutest, or at least the supplied power supply, in the months HiFi News. Specifically Paul Miller who did the technical review and measurements says:
> 
> “I will very rarely suggest upgrading a part the moment you have bought it but, if the 5V/2A switch-mode wall wart supplied here is indicative, then replacing it with a superior USB charger will surely reap subjective benefits. The supplied charger suffused the Qutest with sufficient switching noise and other interference that it proved impossible to realise it’s true technical potential. So I tested the Qutest with my (Oppo) smartphone charger instead, ridding the DAC’s output of spurious noise.”
> 
> ...



Perhaps @ChordElectronics can chime in on whether the initial batch of power supplies included with the Qutest are any different than the latest shipments. I’m not hearing any interference with my new Qutest, or at least I haven’t noticed any. I do remember Rob mentioning using a battery power supply with his, but whether it was only for travel or also home use, I don’t recall. Reviewers do get early batch samples for review at times, so maybe there has been a change.

I imagine an external power supply’s performance can be impacted by the electrical circuit in one’s home, i.e., dimmer switches, appliance electrical noise, RFI, and other such things. At least, that is certainly the case in my experience with high end componentry with internal power supplies.


----------



## Nejiro

I use an iPower ifi and I feel great ......


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nejiro said:


> I use an iPower ifi and I feel great ......


IIRC a fellow member posted that this power supply sounded noticeably worse than the stock one...


----------



## STR-1

At least you Qutest users have the freedom to use a different power supply.  Warranty terms for the M Scaler prohibit use of any power supply other than the one provided.


----------



## Nejiro

Zzt231gr said:


> IIRC a fellow member posted that this power supply sounded noticeably worse than the stock one...



Honestly I do not know, with the 2Qute I found myself very well with an ifi and I took it in a closed box also for the Qutest, I will try to put back the original one ....


----------



## jwbrent

STR-1 said:


> At least you Qutest users have the freedom to use a different power supply.  Warranty terms for the M Scaler prohibit use of any power supply other than the one provided.



Very interesting, I wonder why that is ...


----------



## dawktah2

jwbrent said:


> Very interesting, I wonder why that is ...



Qutest is a micro-usb isn't the mScaler a round low voltage plug?


----------



## STR-1

dawktah2 said:


> Qutest is a micro-usb isn't the mScaler a round low voltage plug?


M Scaler takes a 5.5mm x 2.5mm barrel plug.


----------



## agedbest

power supply?!?!?...no update?!?!?....new Mscaler?!?!?



go direct to musical event.....so you don't need DAC or other


----------



## soares

Zzt231gr said:


> IIRC a fellow member posted that this power supply sounded noticeably worse than the stock one...



In my system, I prefer the sound from the stock power supply. I have tried HDPlex and iFi. I will try in a couple months both the LPS 1.2 and the new Sbooster.
With my older Qutest, the sound was much better using a Sbooster (old model) over the stock PS.
Cheers.


----------



## naynay

OctavianH said:


> Guys, what RCA cables are you using for Qutest connection to the amp? I tried here Chord C-Line 0.5m:
> 
> That QED Performance RCA red plug into Amp looks like it could have done with pushing in more may have altered the sound?
> 
> ...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nothing fancy for now but planning on building my own with Belden 1694A.Excellent audio and digital cable with low capacitance,which I need for my passive preamp.


----------



## dawktah2

Has anyone here auditioned the Mal Valve Head Amp Three mk4?


----------



## dc71

Into my Qutest I have used Bluesound Node 2 (spdif coax and toslink), SOTM sms200, and Lumin D1 (spdif bnc). For me, the Qutest sounds best with its galvanically isolated inputs. The SOTM via USB sounded supremely natural, followed by the Node2 with Lifatec glass toslink. Lumin D1 sounds marginally more 'tense' and digital (less engaging) by comparison. The sound quality delta between SOTM and Node2 was greater than between Node2 and D1 which is marginal.

Unfortunately I can't live with the SOTM as I want to be able to switch between local files, Tidal and Spotify without messing in a browser. It was also much slower in operation and locked up more than the Bluesound/Lumin units both of which have great control apps and seamless library/streaming service access.

I'm looking at the Lumin U1 mini or an Auralic Aries femto to provide the best combo of sound and usability for me, hoping that either will be as good or better sounding than the SOTM. If you only use local files or only one of the streaming services then I would highly recommend the SOTM based on sound quality alone paired with Qutest.

Has anyone compared these or would have any other recommendation for network transports for Qutest? Minimum requirements are local NAS/UPnP files, Tidal and Spotify with seamless switching between each and a decent control app. Anyone heard/used a Pro-ject Stream Box S2 Ultra, or even tried a Cambridge CXN (assuming there's no point to going for 851N if the internal DAC is not used)?


----------



## gad1 (Oct 12, 2018)

Hesitation blues:

I will be buying a qutest despite a few doubts:

1. Is the lack luster power supply issue for real? Were the problems only with the very first batches? Only way to know for sure
is to compare it to an after mrkt. psu; an additional cost which in the USA prices it right with the new improved Yggy.
2. Anecdotally I have the impression that more qutest dacs are being re-sold than the competition, the new Yggy, Brooklyn +,
Benchmark dac3, etc.

So why am I buying?  Sabre dacs grate on my ears. My prior dac was the original Yggy.  Way better than sabre but after a
couple of yrs. it bored me.  My speaker only system only has se (rca) connects for the preamp and amp.  I will not buy a
balanced dac and subject myself to yrs. of reading how much better it sounds through the xlr connects, soooo, fingers
crossed, bring on the qutest.

gad-


----------



## AlexB73

Why so many people has that silly opinion that 2qute an Qutest "MUST HAVE" after market PSU?
I like both 2qute and Qutest with PSU supplied by Chord.
I tried 2qute with after market and not cheap PSU an was deeply disappointed. It made 2qute sound horrible compared to supplied Chord PSU.
I sold that PSU on eBay by half of the price.


----------



## dolphy007

Amen brother! Too much noise is made about the power supplies.

I doubt that Chord would intentionally provide an inferior power supply. It would only hurt their products performance 

I wish PSU discussions would be banned from all Chord threads and someone should start dedicated PSU discussion threads.


----------



## Zzt231gr

gad1 said:


> Hesitation blues:
> 
> I will be buying a qutest despite a few doubts:
> 
> ...


Qutest is the thing!You won't get dissapointed.

Is it just me that thinks that this thread is dying due to HMS?


----------



## dawktah2

Zzt231gr said:


> Is it just me that thinks that this thread is dying due to HMS?



Nope...


----------



## Blueshound24

Zzt231gr said:


> Qutest is the thing!You won't get dissapointed.
> 
> Is it just me that thinks that this thread is dying due to HMS?



What is HMS?


----------



## SoundeScapes (Oct 12, 2018)

I saw some PSU posts here today and realised I haven't even tried the included PSU.
Why? Because when I bought 2Qute 3 years ago it was terribly bright. I just couldn't listen to some music.
The dealer told me to give it 3-4 weeks. I tried the "usual" things. USB cables, Jitterbugs and PSU.
All made a slight improvement and if the 2Qute "settled" or not I don't know but eventually it started to sound really good.
When I sold the 2Qute I also sold the Sbooster because it would not work with Qutest.
A few months before buying Qutest I bought a HDPlex PSU to power my PC and USB card and since it have 5V USB connector
that's what I started with and have been using since.

But tonight I finally got to try the stock PSU. Having read some posters preferring it to other PSU's
I was curious about it. At first I couldn't detect much of a difference at all but after a while, after trying different kinds of music,
I found the stock PSU to be slightly brighter. I listen to a lot of violin music and I'm very sensitive to harsh and bright violins.
The bass was a tad thinner as well.
The HDPlex seemed to calm everything down a bit. Smoother highs, fuller sound and a bit better bass. Without loosing details.
Now, I don't want to start the debate all over again. Just give my impressions and keep the Qutest thread alive 
I should point out that these are very small differences overall but I think it is worth it because of the music I listen to.
It is far from a night and day difference though that some people claim. At least in my setup.


----------



## dawktah2

Just saw the article on Head-Fi home page for the Manley Absolute Headphone amplifier. Looks cool and has a remote.  I can also connect a turntable to it I think?  Was trying to decide to keep my Qutest vs selling and getting the TT 2. Any experiences with their gear? Prima Luna DiaLogue was also suggested.


----------



## nephilim32

Hi all . Haven't really shared my system updated with the Qutest! 
I really love it and i welcome opinions from all on here (good or bad) about my favored rig. 
Currently i use a Cyrus cd i complete with the PSXR-2, Burson soloist amp, Chord qutest dac of course, Hd 800'C With after market Alo Audio Reference 16 silver/copper cable. My system is complete with a furman powerline conditioner, audio quest king cobra rca connectors, and a pangea 9se Ac power cord for the burson amp. 
I also use a Oppo blu ray player 83 that plays sacds as well when i want to listen to higher bitdepth recordings . however the cyrus is the best .

Anyhow. This is the best system i have had ever. I believe that is in large part due to the qutest . I really love it and what a huge difference compared to other dacs i own or have tried . 

I really cannot imagine aquiring anything better only different at this point .My plan is to gun for the M-Scaler to really seal the deal. All in all. I am in hifi heaven . love the dynamics!


----------



## veeceeem

gad1 said:


> Hesitation blues:
> 
> I will be buying a qutest despite a few doubts:
> 
> ...


Don't buy the Qutest if yyou already have Yggy. It may sound differently, but wont be better (if you are serious about details of the songs, Yggy will score a big win, tbh)


----------



## Rob Watts

veeceeem said:


> Don't buy the Qutest if yyou already have Yggy. It may sound differently, but wont be better (if you are serious about details of the songs, Yggy will score a big win, tbh)



Really?

Qutest definitely sounds very, very different. Some prefer Yggy; many categorically and profoundly do not; it's the users money, choice and taste.

They measure very differently; Qutest gives state of the art measurements but Yggy categorically does not. And measurements matter profoundly...


----------



## veeceeem

Rob Watts said:


> Really?
> 
> Qutest definitely sounds very, very different. Some prefer Yggy; many categorically and profoundly do not; it's the users money, choice and taste.
> 
> They measure very differently; Qutest gives state of the art measurements but Yggy categorically does not. And measurements matter profoundly...


I agree that it's personal preference. I shouldnt have commented on such a matter  on the other hand, I prefer Qutest because I think it's what music should sound like, it gives an incredible feeling whenever a song is played


----------



## Rob Watts

veeceeem said:


> I agree that it's personal preference. I shouldnt have commented on such a matter  on the other hand, I prefer Qutest because I think it's what music should sound like, it gives an incredible feeling whenever a song is played



That's exactly right - it's being able to enjoy music more that is important - that is, letting the music engage you emotionally, and being able to listen for hours on end without listening fatigue. At the end of the day, nothing else matters...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Blueshound24 said:


> What is HMS?


Hugo M Scaler


veeceeem said:


> Don't buy the Qutest if yyou already have Yggy. It may sound differently, but wont be better (if you are serious about details of the songs, Yggy will score a big win, tbh)


I remember at least 2 members stating that Qutest is better than Yggy A2.


----------



## veeceeem

Zzt231gr said:


> Hugo M Scaler
> I remember at least 2 members stating that Qutest is better than Yggy A2.


I was one of the two I assume


----------



## Christer (Oct 13, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Really?
> 
> Qutest definitely sounds very, very different. Some prefer Yggy; many categorically and profoundly do not; it's the users money, choice and taste.
> 
> They measure very differently; Qutest gives state of the art measurements but Yggy categorically does not. And measurements matter profoundly...




Hello Rob, I know you have mentioned a powerbank that works well with Qutest. Would you mind quoting the name of it again?
I have forgotten which one you named quite a while go here.

I am planning to slim down my bulk and weight allowance at the hand luggage checking gates this winter I carry  pro camera equipment as well, not only personal audio ,and will only bring a lightweight battery powered headphone amp to use with my Qutest instead of the 3lbs amp I lugged around last winter.
And if I could also run my Qutest off grid  I would need to resort to my HUGO 1 less often for my music  listening sessions even when out in a jungle camp off the beaten track.
How many  listening hours could I expect from a good powerbank with Qutest?
Cheers Christer getting ready for another winter in tropics again.


----------



## Rob Watts

It's the Poweradd Pilot Pro 2. And it will drive the Hugo M scaler too (set to 12v), as well as the Qutest using the USB 5v OP. And you won't get into trouble at airports with power as it is 85W/h and labelled as such - some airports confiscate battery banks at 100W/h or above.

Since it is 85W/h you, on paper, will get 35 hours with a Qutest as a load. I get 7 hours with my Hugo M scaler.

A battery bank will give you the perfect PSU for use with Qutest.


----------



## Christer

Rob Watts said:


> It's the Poweradd Pilot Pro 2. And it will drive the Hugo M scaler too (set to 12v), as well as the Qutest using the USB 5v OP. And you won't get into trouble at airports with power as it is 85W/h and labelled as such - some airports confiscate battery banks at 100W/h or above.
> 
> Since it is 85W/h you, on paper, will get 35 hours with a Qutest as a load. I get 7 hours with my Hugo M scaler.
> 
> A battery bank will give you the perfect PSU for use with Qutest.




Thanks I will get one of those for this winter's travels then.
Cheers Christer


----------



## Lodwales81

Would a battery supply provide a cleaner sound than a mains supply. 

Regards


----------



## miketlse

Lodwales81 said:


> Would a battery supply provide a cleaner sound than a mains supply.
> 
> Regards


It can for some owners.
The 'quality' of mains power varies widely, and sometimes includes significant amounts of electrical noise.
If this noise passes through power supplies, then it can reach dacs, amplifiers etc, and cause the sound to become brighter than it should be.
Using a battery pack, removes one source of electrical noise from the av system.
@Rob Watts has posted many times about the hazards of RFI and electrical noise.


----------



## Nik74

I just ordered one of these battery power banks on eBay. Got a used one for half the price so it will be an inexpensive experiment to compare it to the psu supplied by Chord.
On a similar subject, I m persuaded that my Mac is also a source of noise. And wondering if something inexpensive like Innuos Zen mini or auralic Aries mini or similar would be an audible improvement over my Mac book ? 
Is Chord planning to launch a streamer or network bridge on a price bracket similar to Qutest at some point ? And if not , what is an official recommendation for a low noise source that would be ideal for the task ?


----------



## Christer (Oct 13, 2018)

miketlse said:


> It can for some owners.
> The 'quality' of mains power varies widely, and sometimes includes significant amounts of electrical noise.
> If this noise passes through power supplies, then it can reach dacs, amplifiers etc, and cause the sound to become brighter than it should be.
> Using a battery pack, removes one source of electrical noise from the av system.
> @Rob Watts has posted many times about the hazards of RFI and electrical noise.



I hope you are right and definitely suspect that you are. For one thing, basically the only way I have been enjoying my HUGO 1 has been with my laptop on battery and HUGO without being power  connected.
And now trying a battery powered headphone amp instead of my usual one with Qutest I am hearing a wee bit more, very very  low level detail  and acoustic cues with some of my direct reference to how things  actually sounded live tracks.
Now I can hear some things that before I could only hear clearly via my HEKV2 also via my HD800.
Maybe a powerbank would lower the noise floor even further?
Although I suspect that my mbp is also causing noise since I know that some rbcd material sounds more relaxed and less noisy via optical and either of my cd players compared to playing rips of the same via usb and my mbp.
But it seems the Poweradd Pilot 2, Rob recommends is not available here in Sweden so either I will have to get another one, or wait until I get to Singapore in few weeks.
Just hope it is available there.
Cheers Christer


----------



## miketlse

Christer said:


> I hope you are right and definitely suspect that you are. For one thing, basically the only way I have been enjoying my HUGO 1 has been with my laptop on battery and HUGO without being power  connected.
> And now trying a battery powered headphone amp instead of my usual one with Qutest I am hearing a wee bit more, very very  low level detail  and acoustic cues with some of my direct reference to how things  actually sounded live tracks.
> Maybe a powerbank would lower the noise floor even further?
> Although I also suspect that my mbp is also causing noise since I know that some rbcd material sounds more relaxed and less noisy via optical and either of my cd players compared to playing rips of the same via usb and my mbp.
> ...


I hope that you manage to obtain a suitable powerbank.
Your experiences over the coming months, will be able to provide interesting feedback for the growing number of posters, asking about battery supplies and powerbanks.


----------



## thePhones

Rob Watts said:


> It's the Poweradd Pilot Pro 2. And it will drive the Hugo M scaler too (set to 12v), as well as the Qutest using the USB 5v OP. And you won't get into trouble at airports with power as it is 85W/h and labelled as such - some airports confiscate battery banks at 100W/h or above.
> 
> Since it is 85W/h you, on paper, will get 35 hours with a Qutest as a load. I get 7 hours with my Hugo M scaler.
> 
> A battery bank will give you the perfect PSU for use with Qutest.



Nice, I just ordered one. What happens if I accidentally set the powerbank to one of the higher voltages. I'm curios if the m scaler has over-voltage protection, or do I have to be really careful with it?


----------



## miketlse

Christer said:


> I hope you are right and definitely suspect that you are. For one thing, basically the only way I have been enjoying my HUGO 1 has been with my laptop on battery and HUGO without being power  connected.
> And now trying a battery powered headphone amp instead of my usual one with Qutest I am hearing a wee bit more, very very  low level detail  and acoustic cues with some of my direct reference to how things  actually sounded live tracks.
> Now I can hear some things that before I could only hear clearly via my HEKV2 also via my HD800.
> Maybe a powerbank would lower the noise floor even further?
> ...


The Poweradd Pilot 2 is hard to find, maybe it is no longer in production. The Poweradd Pilot Pro 3 is available, but unfortunately only supplies 5V, which does reduce its flexibility for some people.
https://www.amazon.fr/POWERADD-Pilot-Pro-téléphones-tablettes/dp/B07585XKXM


----------



## Zzt231gr

thePhones said:


> Nice, I just ordered one. What happens if I accidentally set the powerbank to one of the higher voltages. I'm curios if the m scaler has over-voltage protection, or do I have to be really careful with it?


Please report back with the results!


----------



## thePhones

Zzt231gr said:


> Please report back with the results!


Maybe I'll get 1,5 Million taps with 20V ...No I don't, not on purpose.


----------



## Rob Watts

thePhones said:


> Nice, I just ordered one. What happens if I accidentally set the powerbank to one of the higher voltages. I'm curios if the m scaler has over-voltage protection, or do I have to be really careful with it?



There is input protection, but this is just for transients or short term over voltage. You could blow the protection diode if you use voltages above 15v, the rated input, hence why I set it too 12v with battery operation.


----------



## Christer

Rob Watts said:


> There is input protection, but this is just for transients or short term over voltage. You could blow the protection diode if you use voltages above 15v, the rated input, hence why I set it too 12v with battery operation.



Hello again Rob and thanks for your advice regarding the powerbank P2. But it seems a bit difficult to find.
 I know I could order it online but I am leaving soon and don't want to risk not getting it before then. It seems safer to buy one in Singapore once  I am there again.
Would the Poweradd Pilot 3  mikelse suggests,be an ok subsistute if it proves easier to find?
Or would I risk having it confiscated at airports?
It seems to deliver 100W/h.
Cheers Christer


----------



## dc71

Nik74 said:


> I just ordered one of these battery power banks on eBay. Got a used one for half the price so it will be an inexpensive experiment to compare it to the psu supplied by Chord.
> On a similar subject, I m persuaded that my Mac is also a source of noise. And wondering if something inexpensive like Innuos Zen mini or auralic Aries mini or similar would be an audible improvement over my Mac book ?
> ..........and if not , what is an official recommendation for a low noise source that would be ideal for the task ?



I have tried various streaming transports into Qutest now including, Bluesound node2, sotm sms200, lumin D1 and Lumin U1 mini.

Sms200 had the best sound value per $, but the control is not so usable especially if you use all 3 of local files, tidal and Spotify (probably good enough if you use only 2 of the 3).
Bluesound OS
 and app is great to use for all local and internet streaming sources. The sound is not quite as good with Qutest as the sms200, but I found it could be optimised slightly by using a good glass toslink (I used lifatec which sounded better to my ears than qed performance optical).

Lumin U1 mini is the best all round with great sound quality and usability/app, but comes at a higher price.

I have also powered Qutest with its own PS, an ifi iPower and an Anker 26400 battery pack. In my system the iPower made things sound slightly light/thin. The original PS and the Anker battery bank seemed to keep the right weight, gravitas and dynamics for the music. I think the Anker is a good option to try for off grid play, as it gives a good number of hours play for Qutest and is well built.


----------



## Christer (Oct 14, 2018)

dc71 said:


> I have tried various streaming transports into Qutest now including, Bluesound node2, sotm sms200, lumin D1 and Lumin U1 mini.
> 
> Sms200 had the best sound value per $, but the control is not so usable especially if you use all 3 of local files, tidal and Spotify (probably good enough if you use only 2 of the 3).
> Bluesound OS
> ...


Interesting ,but it seems like the one Rob recommended the one you recommend also seems to be deleted?
I can't find it for sale at any online outlet currently .There is 2800 model though.
But without any indication of W/h.
Any other tips or recommendations of powerbanks that would both work well with Qutest and last long on a charge for offgrid use?
I would not want anything that deteriorates SQ,nor anything that could be  confiscated at Airports .
Cheers Christer


----------



## dc71 (Oct 14, 2018)

Christer said:


> Interesting ,but it seems like the one Rob recommended the one you recommend also seems to be deleted?
> I can't find it for sale at any online outlet currently .There is 2800 model though.
> But without any indication of W/h.
> Any other tips or recommendations of powerbanks that would both work well with Qutest and last long on a charge for offgrid use?
> ...



Sorry I meant Anker 26800 model. It's still available on Amazon UK and elsewhere. It's written 96.48Wh on the unit itself, and I heard no degraded sound quality. In fact I doubt I could tell the difference in a blind test between the power bank and the supplied PS plugged into the dedicated electrical spur I use for my hifi.


----------



## miketlse

dc71 said:


> Sorry I meant Anker 26800 model. It's still available on Amazon UK and elsewhere. It's written 96.48Wh on the unit itself, and I heard no degraded sound quality. In fact I doubt I could tell the difference in a blind test between the power bank and the supplied PS plugged into the dedicated electrical spur I use for my hifi.


https://www.amazon.fr/Anker-PowerCore-Batterie-Externe-Capacité/dp/B01JIWQPMW


----------



## Nik74

dc71 said:


> I have tried various streaming transports into Qutest now including, Bluesound node2, sotm sms200, lumin D1 and Lumin U1 mini.
> 
> Sms200 had the best sound value per $, but the control is not so usable especially if you use all 3 of local files, tidal and Spotify (probably good enough if you use only 2 of the 3).
> Bluesound OS
> ...



Thank you for these suggestions. Would you say that the bluesound or sms200 was a noticeable step up sonically from simply using a Mac through usb to the Qutest?


----------



## nephilim32

Rob Watts said:


> That's exactly right - it's being able to enjoy music more that is important - that is, letting the music engage you emotionally, and being able to listen for hours on end without listening fatigue. At the end of the day, nothing else matters...



True but that of course depends on your music sources . if one dares to listen to hyper compressed recordings there is definitely no DAC on planet earth that can fix or smooth out that listening experience .


----------



## bmfmarius

> Would you say that the bluesound or sms200 was a noticeable step up sonically from simply using a Mac through usb to the Qutest?


Yes
Get the sms200 and a good lps


----------



## nephilim32 (Oct 14, 2018)

Also . Just a brief note here. I use an Anker Power Bank . It is 21,000 mah capacity and i can get about 10 to 11 hrs out of it . Very solid and durable .
Uses what is called 'IQ' technology which regulates and distributes the amount of power (voltage) needed to power your device . The Qutest surprisingly doesn't require orgre power to run...unlike my Cypher labs Algorythm Trio portable tube amp . just eats this power bank .
Also . it is 5v input and 5v ouput.


----------



## jwbrent (Oct 14, 2018)

The Poweradd Pilot Pro 2 is $90 on Amazon. The newer version with higher capacity—Pilot Pro 3–is $40 although it only has 5v outputs and it appears traveling international requires a special permission letter from the airline.


----------



## dc71

Nik74 said:


> Thank you for these suggestions. Would you say that the bluesound or sms200 was a noticeable step up sonically from simply using a Mac through usb to the Qutest?



I haven't used a Mac/PC as a source, but based on reviews and what I hear I would expect the Node 2 with glass toslink to be a noticeable step ahead of computer streaming. SMS200 in my system was clearly a step up sonically from node 2. The SOTM and Qutest have a sound which can put a big grin on your face.. 

Hans Beekhuyzen just reviewed the Pro-ject stream box S2 ultra on his YouTube channel, looks worth checking out as an option.


----------



## jwbrent

So my question is since the Qutest has a galvanic input for USB, doesn’t that help minimize the difference between, let’s say, a MacBook and a dedicated transport like the Node 2/SMS200/Aries mini? I suppose it’s a different story when one uses a multi-thousand dollar transport such as an AURALiC or Lumin.

I’m using a six year old MacBook Air that was maxed out option wise when I bought it. My music software is Audirvana+. I was thinking about getting the new Mac mini that is rumored to be released this month or next, or maybe a sub $1,000 transport which there aren’t many of from what I can see. I’d love a Lumin transport, but I can’t justify the significant increase in cost. 

I have about 600GB of music files including DSD files, so the idea of something simple like the Mac mini with a terabyte drive really appeals to my sensitivities, but I keep reading that using a computer, even an expensive one, is subpar because of the noisy environment contained within.

Hence, my question about the galvanic input on the Qutest.


----------



## knopi (Oct 15, 2018)

jwbrent said:


> I was thinking about getting the new Mac mini that is rumored to be released this month or next


I waited for new mac mini a few years, so good luck


----------



## agedbest

Qutest was in my "DAC to buy" wish list ...but then i didn't buy qutest for it's powerwall,...definitively not indicated for an audio protection from AC source noise.
now it seems some user note this problem
but a battery-pack it is not the final solution, for it's built restriction and internal volt conversion...see what there is inside a battery-pack...note also battery is not noise immune, it is a common mistake think it.

I advised about this problem before qutest was released....

my choise was for a matrix x-sabre pro for it's superb build, linear power supply with Noratel transformer and Nichicon caps, not so heavy, slim, all in one, also indicated for a desktop use ....very good value for money, bought it for 1280 euro (retail price 1650 euro)=.


----------



## Mrandrade

So, what are you doing here?


----------



## nephilim32

agedbest said:


> Qutest was in my "DAC to buy" wish list ...but then i didn't buy qutest for it's powerwall,...definitively not indicated for an audio protection from AC source noise.
> now it seems some user note this problem
> but a battery-pack it is not the final solution, for it's built restriction and internal volt conversion...see what there is inside a battery-pack...note also battery is not noise immune, it is a common mistake think it.
> 
> ...



This is a pretty extreme post .  I use the Qutest run through my Furman Linear AC Powerline conditioner with the stock PSU and it is dead silient. The only hiss or micrphonic noises I hear are due to my recordings themselves. 
The Qutest is excellently built in every capacity.


----------



## dac64

agedbest said:


> my choise was for a matrix x-sabre pro for it's superb build, linear power supply with Noratel transformer and Nichicon caps, not so heavy, slim, all in one, also indicated for a desktop use ....very good value for money, bought it for 1280 euro (retail price 1650 euro)=.



Yeah boy! The most expensive part of the Qutest is the aluminium black coasted casing but it works well on my system.


----------



## Triode User

nephilim32 said:


> This is a pretty extreme post .  I use the Qutest run through my Furman Linear AC Powerline conditioner with the stock PSU and it is dead silient. The only hiss or micrphonic noises I hear are due to my recordings themselves.
> The Qutest is excellently built in every capacity.



When people are discussing ‘noise’ from power sources or power supplies or indeed generally with digital domain audio devices we are normally referring to RF noise. This does not produce hiss or microphonic noise etc, instead it tends to introduce a harshness or false sense of detail into the music.


----------



## Zzt231gr

So,Rob,to clarify;does the power bank you are refering sound better than the stock psu?Or are you mentioning it for portability issues?


----------



## agedbest

nephilim32 said:


> This is a pretty extreme post .  I use the Qutest run through my Furman Linear AC Powerline conditioner with the stock PSU and it is dead silient. The only hiss or micrphonic noises I hear are due to my recordings themselves.
> The Qutest is excellently built in every capacity.




Sorry, you are using with powerline conditioner?!?!?
try it without your contiditioner....and then you can told us how it works..if you do not listen difference without , you're very lucky


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes it was for a portability post. Here, it sounds the same, but YMMV - it depends upon the rest of your system. Battery banks represents the best possible power supply, very much better than linear as no leakage currents at all, and no RF noise.


----------



## agedbest

dac64 said:


> Yeah boy! The most expensive part of the Qutest is the aluminium black coasted casing but it works well on my system.



you take a look of matrix Xsabre pro?

it has CNC aluminium case also.....


----------



## dac64 (Oct 17, 2018)

agedbest said:


> you take a look of matrix Xsabre pro?
> 
> it has CNC aluminium case also.....



You didn't get what I meant!  which is more  important, the chassis or the electronics within?

Btw, if one looking to experience the full potential 1M tapes, chord dac is to buy!


----------



## jwbrent (Oct 17, 2018)

dc71 said:


> Hans Beekhuyzen just reviewed the Pro-ject stream box S2 ultra on his YouTube channel, looks worth checking out as an option.



The Pro-ject looks interesting and is pretty much exactly what I need. I spoke to a dealer and Sumiko is shipping them in November with an $849 US retail. Pro-ject makes an LPS that aesthetically matches, but I’m not quite sure what the price is, perhaps around $200.


----------



## agedbest

dac64 said:


> You didn't get what I meant!  which is more  important, the chassis or the electronics within?
> 
> Btw, if one looking to experience the full potential 1M tapes, chord dac is to buy!




sorry, but i can't reply to your intentional thinking and you didn't write, i can reply to what you wrote only...

if you need 1M taps experience ....you can buy Dave just now
if you add the price of qutest+btw you not so far from a dave used price
with more future, and audio linear power inside it
there are alot on the market

if you like chord DAC, is the way to go


----------



## Nik74

@agedbest It's great that you have a DAC that you are excited about, it is such a wonderful feeling when that happens in our hobby. 
A lot of us in this little corner feel similarly about the Qutest. It measures great and sounds superb !

I am wondering about two things though: have you actually ever auditioned the Qutest?
If not, in the context of this thread, your opinions about its performance are assumptions that even though you have every right to , don’t really add much to this discussion. To me at least, your post would be of relevance if a comparison between the two dacs was backed by sonic impressions.It is the sound and the music that matters most at the end of the day or so I d hope...
In the absence of your first hand impressions of the Qutest it is perhaps a bit out of place to insist about the Matrix DAC here, to my perception at least. 
It might be more prolific and fun if you shared your enthusiasm about the x-sabre pro in its dedicated thread, there is at least one in this forum. 

Enjoy the music


----------



## AlexB73

I don't understand why people without any technical knowledge and engineering education like to blame Qutest DAC for inbox power supply.
And they do it even without listening of this DAC!!!
Rob Watts have been designing DACs for decades. Even his old Deltec/DPA DAC are respected by audiophiles even today.
If he made decision to use this power supply with Qutest DAC it wasn't done by chance.
I bought MCRU linear power supply to my Chod 2qute DAC. It was a big mistake. It ruined well balanced sound of my 2qute.
As result I sold MCRU linear power on eBay for half of the price.


----------



## VintageFlanker

Nik74 said:


> It measures great and sounds superb !


About that,

Unfortunately, the only Qutest measurements I saw were few days ago in both Hi-fi News and Hi-fi World November releases. Different methods, different numbers...
Is anybody may link or talk about Qutest "great" measurements, I would be grateful!


----------



## Chop-Top (Oct 17, 2018)

> if you need 1M taps experience ....you can buy Dave just now


 @agedbest Check the Dave specs.  Believe it has way lower than 1M Taps. More like 164k


----------



## dac64

agedbest said:


> sorry, but i can't reply to your intentional thinking and you didn't write, i can reply to what you wrote only...
> 
> if you need 1M taps experience ....you can buy Dave just now
> if you add the price of qutest+btw you not so far from a dave used price
> ...



Someone said under hugo tt 2 thread :

"It was something I was going to post recently, and was thinking that the M-Scaler has put Chord back on top. Meaning I really was not being vindictive to Chord. However I still worried about posting of the competitive DACs.

I was going to say something like this, a couple of weeks ago. Even the Hugo 2 and MScaler may outperform the two other DACS that are considered better than the DAVE. Especially when you consider price. Hugo 2 £1800, MScaler £4000.

Reviewed recently by What HiFi, the new Nagra HD DAC/MPS review Tested at *£23600*
https://www.whathifi.com/nagra/hd-dacmps/review

and secondly
dCS Rossini DAC/ Rossini Master Clockreview *£22610*
https://www.whathifi.com/dcs/rossini-dac-rossini-master-clock/review"


----------



## agedbest

Nik74 said:


> @agedbest It's great that you have a DAC that you are excited about, it is such a wonderful feeling when that happens in our hobby.
> A lot of us in this little corner feel similarly about the Qutest. It measures great and sounds superb !
> 
> I am wondering about two things though: have you actually ever auditioned the Qutest?
> ...



yes, i tried qutest before, and matrix about an hour later
i was not impressed with chord dac signature
and i prefered matrix ....expecially with DSD file or upsampling file
difference with PCM 16bit and 24bit file not so distinguish, but better over the full range, very detailed, clear sound, natural, dynamic, deep.
qutest defend themselves well on the high range, but less on the low range.
qutest remains a good dac but it would have been much better to provide it with a better power source. also the retailer thinking it would be better to spend some pounds over the power source and not in a luxury packing box.

last but not the least... it is more ecletic, with a good power amplifier, 7 digital filter, upgradable firmware, more input and output, and a solid remote.

when i tried qutest it was protected by a power conditioner....so in its best form....matrix nope.


----------



## AlexB73

I don't see any issue with Qutest base.
It is detailed, textured and deep enough.
But I have 15 inch base driver speakers. I don't need to bloating base by source or amplifier.
I listen classical music, jazz and a little old good rock.
I don't listen electric bass modern music.


----------



## kovacs

I own the Chord Qutest for a few months now, I have no issues with the bass either. It’s not an aspect of it’s sound signature that draws attention to itself but I never find it lacking, it always sounds natural and well balanced to me. I use a tube amp with standmounts and a dedicated REL subwoofer. The warm filter can definitely help with poor and bright recordings with little bass to give the sound more body and make it less fatiguing to your ears, but overall I find the Chord Qutest to be more forgiving with poor and harsh sounding recordings than my other DACs or players. I tend to leave it on the white ( neutral ) filter most of the time and never use any of the HF roll-off filters since my tube amp does that on it’s own anyway. I tried a dedicated power supply and it sounded way worse so I’m using the included one which sounds great, but it does look and feel very cheap. I’m sure a different power supply will change the sound, but you will need a pretty high end one for better sound it seems. The Qutest was one of my best buys ever, but it has also showed me flaws and problems in my system that I didn’t notice before. My system now sound better than ever and I can’t stop buying and listening music.


----------



## gad1

If a Qutest purchased in and used in the USA needs
a warranty repair are their Chord warranty facilities
in the US or does it have to be shipped to England?

thanks-


----------



## jwbrent

gad1 said:


> If a Qutest purchased in and used in the USA needs
> a warranty repair are their Chord warranty facilities
> in the US or does it have to be shipped to England?
> 
> thanks-



I believe a Chord product needing repair—warranty or not—ships back to the US distributor, and they ship it back to England. Your dealer should take care of this for you. I’ve never read about any repair center in the US. If anyone knows anything different, please respond.

The fortunate thing about the Qutest is there’s not much to go wrong within the warranty period, maybe ten years or so down the road, but nothing in the short term. Since the unit does not have a power switch and is meant to be left on 24/7, I could see the LEDs used for the balls and porthole burning out in the long term.


----------



## nephilim32

nephilim32 said:


> This is a pretty extreme post .  I use the Qutest run through my Furman Linear AC Powerline conditioner with the stock PSU and it is dead silient. The only hiss or micrphonic noises I hear are due to my recordings themselves.
> The Qutest is excellently built in every capacity.





Triode User said:


> When people are discussing ‘noise’ from power sources or power supplies or indeed generally with digital domain audio devices we are normally referring to RF noise. This does not produce hiss or microphonic noise etc, instead it tends to introduce a harshness or false sense of detail into the music.



Sure . I understand that . RF noise can occur in a variety of ways especially with improper shielding of caps and other circuit components . All I was saying is that the only anomalies I hear or (noise) are found in Music sources. However, you are right!


----------



## nephilim32

agedbest said:


> Sorry, you are using with powerline conditioner?!?!?
> try it without your contiditioner....and then you can told us how it works..if you do not listen difference without , you're very lucky



Oh I already know . The power line conditioner makes a huge difference. I should have left that out of my point. Not fair, cause without it what you are saying may be true for most people depending on the quality of their electrical wiring coming out of the AC Wall wart . The building i live in was built in 1965 .i would estimate that there is about 10db of noise when you plug any piece of audio equipment to my wall warts . 

Maybe I would suggest to people to try a quality linear power supply before buying a different PSU depending on your audio set up needs.


----------



## Sound Eq

can i ask does qutest support mqa


----------



## miketlse

Sound Eq said:


> can i ask does qutest support mqa


All the decoding has to be done by the music source, that then feeds the input for the Qutest.


----------



## Sound Eq

miketlse said:


> All the decoding has to be done by the music source, that then feeds the input for the Qutest.



well i am connecting my laptop to chord, and using tidal


----------



## Triode User

Sound Eq said:


> can i ask does qutest support mqa



In a word, no. Any MQA unfolding has to be done by software before the digital signal is fed to Qutest. 

Rob Watts has given good reasons though to stay well clear of MQA. (Sorry but his post is hidden somewhere in one of the Chord threads or maybe in Rob Watts own blog).


----------



## Zzt231gr

Sound Eq said:


> can i ask does qutest support mqa


Don't bother with it.


----------



## Christer (Oct 19, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> well i am connecting my laptop to chord, and using tidal



As far as MQA is concerned it seems to be seen as "vaporware" by  some sources by now. Obviously it is not as lossless as initially claimed.
And I think Rob was one of the first to point out its weaknesses.
I doubt it will be much of a commercial success in the long run.
Why would you want it?
As far as I am concerned when I want Masterfile quality I listen to the actual masterfiles not a  compressed  version of them.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 19, 2018)

Triode User said:


> In a word, no. Any MQA unfolding has to be done by software before the digital signal is fed to Qutest.
> 
> Rob Watts has given good reasons though to stay well clear of MQA. (Sorry but his post is hidden somewhere in one of the Chord threads or maybe in Rob Watts own blog).



i am just confused what software unfolding if i am using tidal, is it not supposed to do that work and feed it to the dac

also i see the light colour changes when i use mqa vs non mqa on the qutest


----------



## Triode User

Sound Eq said:


> i am just confused what software unfolding if i am using tidal, is not supposed to that work and feed it to the dac



Others will be more clued up but I recollect from when I used Tidal that you can just use their streaming services or you can use the Tidal Masters which has MQA file size reduction. The Tidal software will do the first MQA unfold but you need an MQA  compatible dac to do the subsequent unfolds. I’m sure you will get a better explanation if you google MQA unfold or something similar.


----------



## miketlse (Oct 19, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> i am just confused what software unfolding if i am using tidal, is it not supposed to do that work and feed it to the dac
> 
> also i see the light colour changes when i use mqa vs non mqa on the qutest


The tidal app has to do the software unfolding - the unfolding cannot be done by the Qutest.
I think there are three levels of unfolding, and the app does the first level.


----------



## Lodwales81

Sound Eq said:


> i am just confused what software unfolding if i am using tidal, is it not supposed to do that work and feed it to the dac
> 
> also i see the light colour changes when i use mqa vs non mqa on the qutest


Tidal is unable to decode the mqa material through its player however you will still get slightly higher res music than standard 16bit just not full mqa. I have both roon and audirava which offer mqa software decoding. There is a lot of bad vibe regarding mqa but I like it and can hear a big difference I would like to try Quobuz sublime but at £350 a year subscription I can't justify it.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 19, 2018)

Lodwales81 said:


> Tidal is unable to decode the mqa material through its player however you will still get slightly higher res music than standard 16bit just not full mqa. I have both roon and audirava which offer mqa software decoding. There is a lot of bad vibe regarding mqa but I like it and can hear a big difference I would like to try Quobuz sublime but at £350 a year subscription I can't justify it.


so if i use roon can I then get full mqa support and roon work with tidal, sorry for these noob questions


----------



## miketlse

Sound Eq said:


> so if i use roon can then get full mqa support and roon work with tidal, sorry for these noob questions


@Rob Watts has posted several times regarding MQA, and this is one example https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/page-65#post-14414362 
Apps will do the first unfold, but hardware is required to do the next stages.


----------



## Lodwales81

Sound Eq said:


> so if i use roon can I then get full mqa support and roon work with tidal, sorry for these noob questions


Roon and audirava will decode more than tidal, only a fully supported dac can do 100% but I'm happy with the software root. Both roon and audirava support tidal streaming basically you log into your account on either of the above and away you go.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 20, 2018)

Lodwales81 said:


> Roon and audirava will decode more than tidal, only a fully supported dac can do 100% but I'm happy with the software root. Both roon and audirava support tidal streaming basically you log into your account on either of the above and away you go.



well just bought Audirvana and of course i hear difference , listened to sting 44/876 album in mqa and non mqa, man of course there is a difference , it was an instant buy when i heard the difference

thanks for telling me about Audirvana 

it took less than a minute to judge for me and am glad i bought Audirvana


----------



## AndrewOld

Lodwales81 said:


> Tidal is unable to decode the mqa material through its player however you will still get slightly higher res music than standard 16bit just not full mqa. I have both roon and audirava which offer mqa software decoding. There is a lot of bad vibe regarding mqa but I like it and can hear a big difference I would like to try Quobuz sublime but at £350 a year subscription I can't justify it.



Qobuz have changed their subscription deals. You can now get high res streaming for £24.99 a month or £249 a year. This is their Studio tier and replaces Sublime. Sublime+ stays, but is now £299 a year, and gives you discounted downloads in addition to hi res streaming. Imo £350 a year was already good value for such a fantastic selection of music, but now with Studio you are paying 68p a day which is negligible. And with Qobuz you get the hi res master. MQA only gives you a lossy version of it. Why go with Tidal when you can have the real thing?


----------



## Christer (Oct 20, 2018)

Maybe  a bit OT ,but I urgently  need some advice for using my Qutest on my travels this winter if my laptop turns out to be irreparable as far as sound via dacs is concerned.
This morning it stopped working with any of my dacs but  works via inbuilt speakers on both channels and the other even older one, still works  as usual with my Qutest or other DACs.
I would like to know what might be wrong with my mbp first because that is where I have my music-player programs Pure Music and Audirvana .
And I would also  like to know if there are better simpler ways to use my Qutest and HUGO this winter via headphones without connecting either to a laptop?
I could transfer my music from my  hardrives and into  a suitable smaller product than a bulky laptop. But how would I get my player programs into one?
Or would they  be unecessary?
And if so which one would you  more experienced guys here recommend?
Until today all my downloads and online listening has been via my main laptop and occasionally the old one.
I want no compromises SQ wise from what I had until today. But I would appreciate a smaller more portable, simpler   easier way to listen to my daily dose of music than having to connect both amp and dac to my laptop.
Yes I know Chord have got their Poly for Mojo but I am not planning to buy either of those two this winter.
If anything more from Chord I am  a bit tempted by the new M-scaler.
Are there  other gadgets  without its own DAC or a DAC that can be bypassed,similar to Poly out there that would work with a Qutest or HUGO?
Ideas and suggestions  would be very welcome.
Cheers Christer


----------



## VintageFlanker

nephilim32 said:


> The building i live in was built in 1965



Same here. That's why I bought a Supra Mains Block filtered many years ago. It works fine this way.



AndrewOld said:


> Why go with Tidal when you can have the real thing?



Hum...perhaps because Tidal and Qobuz don't have the same catalog...at all?...


----------



## Nik74

Christer said:


> Are there other gadgets without its own DAC or a DAC that can be bypassed,similar to Poly out there that would work with a Qutest or HUGO?



It may be too cheap to consider but it is worth as an experiment to try a Google Chromecast Audio. 
Before I go the High End streamer or server route I thought I d check this little gadget and see how it might compare with the USB of my Mac book. I thought  if it offered at least 80%  of the SQ it would be worth the convenience and I m pleased to say that to my ears at least it does. And that is with  cheap optical cable versus my Audioquest carbon USB - apples and oranges I know but SQ is what's imprtant-. My next step is to try a good quality optical cable to see if it will match or even surpass the USB connection. So far I m sensing that I miss some spatial cues like celing reflections in some orchestral recordings or a very slight blurring of the wider ends of the soundstage but nothing I d miss temporarily,specially if this was a travel set up.

Even if you didn't end up liking it , it would be just £30 down the drain.


----------



## AndrewOld

VintageFlanker said:


> Hum...perhaps because Tidal and Qobuz don't have the same catalog...at all?...



Fair enough. Qobuz has enough music that I want to listen to for more lifetimes than I am ever going to have, so I am happy. But I am sure there is a fair bit of overlap in the catalogue, the majority of current and recent releases seem to be in HiRes on Qobuz, so if it were me I would try and make it my prime source and only fall back to the degraded MQA version if I had no alternative.


----------



## jwbrent

AndrewOld said:


> Fair enough. Qobuz has enough music that I want to listen to for more lifetimes than I am ever going to have, so I am happy. But I am sure there is a fair bit of overlap in the catalogue, the majority of current and recent releases seem to be in HiRes on Qobuz, so if it were me I would try and make it my prime source and only fall back to the degraded MQA version if I had no alternative.



Does Qobuz have an artist directory? When I was signed up with Tidal, I found the lack of this feature to be bothersome.


----------



## Christer (Oct 20, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> It may be too cheap to consider but it is worth as an experiment to try a Google Chromecast Audio.
> Before I go the High End streamer or server route I thought I d check this little gadget and see how it might compare with the USB of my Mac book. I thought  if it offered at least 80%  of the SQ it would be worth the convenience and I m pleased to say that to my ears at least it does. And that is with  cheap optical cable versus my Audioquest carbon USB - apples and oranges I know but SQ is what's imprtant-. My next step is to try a good quality optical cable to see if it will match or even surpass the USB connection. So far I m sensing that I miss some spatial cues like celing reflections in some orchestral recordings or a very slight blurring of the wider ends of the soundstage but nothing I d miss temporarily,specially if this was a travel set up.
> 
> Even if you didn't end up liking it , it would be just £30 down the drain.



Thanks for your input. But looking at it online, I don't think Chromecast really is what I am looking for at all.
What I need if I can't use my laptop any longer seems to be some kind of DAC-less  usb or optical connectable portable  audio-player with a way to store and play back  my music  without any losses into and via my Qutest and possibly at a later stage  also an M-scaler.
I have seen that there is a lot of talk around different types of renderers and streamer solutions in other Forums to beat the problems with usb among other things.
I want a simple way to continue to listen to my music at the SQ I am used to with Qutest and usb via my laptop,but without having to connect my dac/headphone amp to my mbp.
But if that fails I may have to get another laptop and hopefully be able to transfer EVERYTHING I have in this laptop to a new one, or ditch both  my Qutest and HUGO in the future and go for some kind of portable player for my travels.
The problem is I also use my 17" mbp for a lot of other things apart from music. And I need the big screen for my photos.
I haven't given  this  much thought before.
But now I can understand the frustration of  those who are obviously so far ,in vain, waiting  for a To-Go unit from Chord for their HUGO 2s.
My limited knowledge  of technical things and searches online have only retrieved small portable player units with DACs already onboard.
And those are NOT what I am looking for.
But are there cheap ones one could use just for storage and playback purposes while still using a Chord DAC and high quality headphones and amplification??
My problem is I am a bit addicted to really  good hi res SQ which Qutest via my latop and has been doing quite well so far. And with the few sessions I have had with my laptop and DAVE/BLU2 I still think some of it was about the best I have ever heard from digital reproduction.
In other words I don't want to compromise. I want even better SQ but without the hazzle of connecting harddrives and dac via different ports to a big heavy bulky laptop.

Cheers Christer


----------



## dc71

Christer said:


> Thanks for your input. But looking at it online, I don't think Chromecast really is what I am looking for at all.
> What I need if I can't use my laptop any longer seems to be some kind of DAC-less  usb or optical connectable portable  audio-player with a way to store and play back  my music  without any losses into and via my Qutest and possibly at a later stage  also an M-scaler.
> I have seen that there is a lot of talk around different types of renderers and streamer solutions in other Forums to beat the problems with usb among other things.
> I want a simple way to continue to listen to my music at the SQ I am used to with Qutest and usb via my laptop,but without having to connect my dac/headphone amp to my mbp.
> ...



Maybe the Allo Digi One or possibly the Pro-ject stream box S2 ultra might do what you want. I think both can be used with an external usb drive or stick with stored music plugged in. Both may need a WiFi connection for control, although the Pro-ject can be controlled from a touch-screen plugged into the HDMI port.


----------



## Christer

dc71 said:


> Maybe the Allo Digi One or possibly the Pro-ject stream box S2 ultra might do what you want. I think both can be used with an external usb drive or stick with stored music plugged in. Both may need a WiFi connection for control, although the Pro-ject can be controlled from a touch-screen plugged into the HDMI port.



Thanks again . I wonder if the Digi might still let me use the same laptop which refuses to recognize my dacs via usb.
But everything else seems to work via my usb ports when connected? But  a quick look at both seems to indicate that neither would be able to take full M-scaling advantage with my Quetest  in a possible future connection with a Chord  M-scaler. Both the Project streamer  and many other gadgets seem to be limited to 32/384.

And it looks both big and needs to be connected to the grid.
It also looks  quite expensive for what it does?

With a laptop I can run things on battery.

I may have to resort to buying a new mbp  laptop and clone my harddrive, to  keep/get what I  already have and really need.
I don't want to abandon my Pure Music or Audirvana unless absolutely necessary.

It also seems like a lot of these newer gadgets popping up on the market come loaded with  internal stuff like MQA/Tidal /ROON and other stuff I have absolutely NO need of whatsoever. 

But thanks a lot for trying to help.

I still hope one can bypass the dac in some of the better DAPs and just use it for storage and playback. 
That would be an easy quick solution if I fail to repair my mbp.
Cheers Christer


----------



## tesarpa

Why not use any smartphone as a player, while you are travelling? Connected to USB DAC...?


----------



## AndrewOld (Oct 20, 2018)

jwbrent said:


> Does Qobuz have an artist directory? When I was signed up with Tidal, I found the lack of this feature to be bothersome.



Not sure quite what you mean .. but if you type in an artist name you’ll get all the albums by that artist, tracks by that artist, and all possible artists with that name or bit of name, and all multi artist albums involving that artist, Not bad. As with all streaming services you are the victim of inconsistent metadata, but I can usually find what I want quicker than I could ever do in a record shop. There’s a Qobuz hires free trial - give it a go and see if it is for you.


----------



## Christer (Oct 20, 2018)

tesarpa said:


> Why not use any smartphone as a player, while you are travelling? Connected to USB DAC...?


 Thanks, I have been thinking of doings so as well, and may do so later.

Meanwhile I have a terrible  and very embarrasing confession to make.

Upon closer inspection of settings on my mbp in audio midi,  it  has been  revealed  to me that the volume slider was for some reason unknown to me, suddenly at ZERO.
No wonder I got no sound via my headphones and dac.
The  big fool I am, I  now have to admit I did not expect a change in settings I had not administered voluntarily was the simple cause of my problem.
I simply did not pay enough attention to details  the first couple of times I checked what might be wrong.
Sorry for taking both a lot of  space here and your time all helpful fellows here !!!
Cheers Christer now again happy as a pig in ****.


----------



## jwbrent

AndrewOld said:


> Not sure quite what you mean .. but if you type in an artist name you’ll get all the albums by that artist, tracks by that artist, and all possible artists with that name or bit of name. As with all streaming services you are the victim of inconsistent metadata, but I can usually find what I want quicker than I could ever do in a record shop. There’s a Qobuz hires free trial - give it a go and see if it is for you.



Thank you for your reply. What I would love is a way to look up artists with an alphabet directory. I suppose if I put in a search, such as A, all artists that begin with A would list. This helps me with music discovery as well as finding artists whose name I’ve forgotten.

I didn’t know Qobuz was live here in the US. I’ll check them out.


----------



## AndrewOld

jwbrent said:


> Thank you for your reply. What I would love is a way to look up artists with an alphabet directory. I suppose if I put in a search, such as A, all artists that begin with A would list. This helps me with music discovery as well as finding artists whose name I’ve forgotten.
> 
> I didn’t know Qobuz was live here in the US. I’ll check them out.


I think Qobuz is “imminent” in the States, but it is software, so  you know what that means .. sometime between now and the end of time


----------



## x RELIC x

Christer said:


> But a quick look at both seems to indicate that neither would be able to take full M-scaling advantage with my Quetest in a possible future connection with a Chord M-scaler. Both the Project streamer and many other gadgets seem to be limited to 32/384.



If your source can output 44.1 in to the M scaler then it would take full adavantage of it, just send it as a bitperfect file with no up-sampling or down-sampling. I’m not sure what you mean when you say ‘limited to 32/384’ when talking about the input of the M scaler. All you need to worry about is the dual connection from the M scaler to the Qutest.

You can look at many DAPs as a source that won’t break the bank, but stay far away from the FiiO X5 iii. It’s horrible to use as a transport with its downsampling of high res 192kHz music to 48kHz through USB out, and 96kHz through coaxial. On top of that I get static through USB and the player is quite unstable.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 20, 2018)

can i ask with qutest and audirvana do u use asio or wasapi option to play from my library

and which is preferred with tidal streaming mqa, i know qutest does not support it,

can i ask as well which laptop is preferred that is known to be good for audiophiles that is not very noisy to use


----------



## Lodwales81

Ok just subscribed to quobuz new studio which offers 24/192 and comparing to Tidals MQA via roon labs as the decoder to my qutest. I had to mess around with my setup to try and find how to link quobuz to play through my sotm sms 200 USB which was a real headache. 

Setups as follows 

Tidal MQA -Roon-mac-sotm sms 200- qutest - beyerdynamic a2 headphone amp - beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones 

Quobuz - Audiravana- sotm sms 200 - qutest - beyerdynamic a2 headphone amp - beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones 

If I don't use my headphone then I play through a Yaquin 13s tube amp to my Dali opticons

My thoughts , cancelled Tidal straight away and keeping Quobuz. Why ! quobuz sound just seems more, more in every aspect. Maybe if I had a similar priced MQA dac as the qutest then I might feel different , but Tidals hi res just feels compact and contained compared to a warmth and wide sound stage of Quobuz.


----------



## AndrewOld

Lodwales81 said:


> Ok just subscribed to quobuz new studio which offers 24/192 and comparing to Tidals MQA via roon labs as the decoder to my qutest. I had to mess around with my setup to try and find how to link quobuz to play through my sotm sms 200 USB which was a real headache.
> 
> Setups as follows
> 
> ...



One thing you might want to check out is Qobuz’ facility for downloading a good number of files and having them available for offline playback. Afaik this is only possible with the Qobuz app itself, but it gives you a way of listening to music if your internet/wireless connection is poor or non-existent. Works on the phone and iPad apps too so no need to pay 4G charges.


----------



## Nik74

To anyone else here that may be favouring toslink over usb transfer of the digital signal to their Qutest: Is it normal that optical to me sounds a bit less detailed ? It almost feels like highs are slightly rolled off. There is zero 'digital' character , everything sounds much more relaxed and easier to listen to , I mean detail is still there but a lot less in your face. I m enjoying it and losing sense of time listening which is great but now I m worried that maybe I m missing the 'edge' of USB. Could it be that I got used to a noisy USB connection or is optical generally of this more laid back character?


----------



## x RELIC x

Nik74 said:


> To anyone else here that may be favouring toslink over usb transfer of the digital signal to their Qutest: Is it normal that optical to me sounds a bit less detailed ? It almost feels like highs are slightly rolled off. There is zero 'digital' character , everything sounds much more relaxed and easier to listen to , I mean detail is still there but a lot less in your face. I m enjoying it and losing sense of time listening which is great but now I m worried that maybe I m missing the 'edge' of USB. Could it be that I got used to a noisy USB connection or is optical generally of this more laid back character?



Yes, what you are describing is electrical noise in the USB line causing noise floor modulation which ‘spices up’ the sound like MSG for audio making it sound brighter (which can be perceived as more detailed), but it’s artificial. The smoother input (in comparison) is always the better choice for fidelity. Give it some time to adjust to the smoother signature.


----------



## Nik74

Thanks @x RELIC x , I suspected so and I guess the fact that I find it more musical should be enough but that nagging feeling that I might be missing something probed me. I ll try a better optical cable soon though too to see what differences if any might appear.


----------



## jwbrent

Nik74 said:


> Thanks @x RELIC x , I suspected so and I guess the fact that I find it more musical should be enough but that nagging feeling that I might be missing something probed me. I ll try a better optical cable soon though too to see what differences if any might appear.



The only issue with using a toslink—either glass or plastic—is any file with greater resolution than 24/192 cannot be transmitted. Additionally, DSD files can also be a problem due to their data density.

I’m pretty sure of my accuracy here from my own experimentation as well as what I’ve read online, but if I’m wrong about this, perhaps someone else can chime in.


----------



## x RELIC x

jwbrent said:


> The only issue with using a toslink—either glass or plastic—is any file with greater resolution than 24/192 cannot be transmitted. Additionally, DSD files can also be a problem due to their data density.
> 
> I’m pretty sure of my accuracy here from my own experimentation as well as what I’ve read online, but if I’m wrong about this, perhaps someone else can chime in.



Yes, absolutely true.


----------



## Deftone

Do that many people really listen to a vast amount of music in DSD and above 192khz?

I'll be honest that my library consists of 93% 44.1khz, 7% 96khz and no DSD. Once i found out opitcal was free from noise etc it was a no brainer to use with Qutest.


----------



## veeceeem

Deftone said:


> Do that many people really listen to a vast amount of music in DSD and above 192khz?
> 
> I'll be honest that my library consists of 93% 44.1khz, 7% 96khz and no DSD. Once i found out opitcal was free from noise etc it was a no brainer to use with Qutest.


May I ask how do you output optical to the Qutest with a laptop? (What device/hardware you use between the laptop and qutest)


----------



## Deftone

veeceeem said:


> May I ask how do you output optical to the Qutest with a laptop? (What device/hardware you use between the laptop and qutest)



You need to have an optical output on your laptop you don’t add any extra device, just like how you would use a usb cable.


----------



## Christer

Deftone said:


> You need to have an optical output on your laptop you don’t add any extra device, just like how you would use a usb cable.


So far I have only been able to use optical via  my cd players and Qutest.
I tried connecting  the optical provided with my Hugo into my mbp but on the mbp there is a different optical port with only a small whole instead.of the square one both on my cd players and Qutest.
Are  there optical cables with square port at one end and mac type at the other end or not?
Or will a mac type connection fit into the Qutest?
Cheers Christer


----------



## plsvn (Oct 22, 2018)

you need a MiniToslink to Toslink cable 
(... or a MiniToslink adapter)


----------



## Deftone

Yes it does sound like a mini toslink is needed


----------



## dawktah2

Does anyone know other than an oscilloscope if there is something to measure RF noise (to rent) on a USB cable?  I was considering isolating my Synology NAS via fiber-optic from the remainder of the network.  However if the Synology itself is generating RF noise its a wasted investment.


----------



## Nik74

I wonder what the official view on Optical as a preferred connection, ie, what Rob Watts might think of it. Besides the fact that not all sampling frequencies are supported, are there other drawbacks ? 
I was looking at streamers with optical out and most of them don’t offer it - except Auralic Aries, bluesound node2 and perhaps other lower end ones. 
It might be a boring question for those clocking a few years into digital but why the preference of usb if it is a ‘noise sensitive’ option ?


----------



## VintageFlanker (Oct 22, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> why the preference of usb if it is a ‘noise sensitive’ option ?



It depends on many things. Some DACs have a proper SPDIF treatment, some don't... Check some measurements reviews at Audiosciencereview, you'll see many DACs don't mesure the same using USB (may be better... Or worse) or SPDIF.

In the case of Qutest. Hi-fi News measured the same performance (at least the same SNR) using USB and SPDIF...BUT... it still transport dependent! If you use a computer with a noisy PSU (I do), you should better go with toslink.

Ps: I hope you're using Roon feeding your Chromecast.


----------



## Lodwales81

I have mac book pro which I connected to my qutest via both optical and USB. The issue with optical is that any audio is passed through the sound card, USB was the more clear and better clarity. I ended up purchasing a sotm sms 200 which has a good improvement on the sound.


----------



## Christer

Lodwales81 said:


> I have mac book pro which I connected to my qutest via both optical and USB. The issue with optical is that any audio is passed through the sound card, USB was the more clear and better clarity. I ended up purchasing a sotm sms 200 which has a good improvement on the sound.


Thanks, well then optical from my mbp is not an option any longer if that's how it works.


----------



## Triode User

Lodwales81 said:


> I have mac book pro which I connected to my qutest via both optical and USB. The issue with optical is that any audio is passed through the sound card, *USB was the more clear and better clarity*. I ended up purchasing a sotm sms 200 which has a good improvement on the sound.



Comments that refer to being clearer or having extra clarity immediately raise the possibility of RF noise causing false detail or false clarity. The usual test of whether a connection method is it better is to see whether the sound is darker, less bright etc, both of which can be regarded as a sign of less RF and therefore being better. (Happy to say IMO and YMMV of course).


----------



## Lodwales81

Christer said:


> Thanks, well then optical from my mbp is not an option any longer if that's how it works.


It's certainly a more relaxed sound and some people prefer it, order a cheap cable from amazon and try it.


----------



## gad1

qutest warranty USA.......

Per the "authorized distributor" I recently purchased from
any warranty repair is handled in the US by the service
dept. of the selling authorized dist.  I would appreciate
Chord Electronics confirming this as warranty policies
are an important factor of my product evaluation.

thanks-

gad-


----------



## x RELIC x

Nik74 said:


> I wonder what the official view on Optical as a preferred connection, ie, what Rob Watts might think of it.



Since you asked:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-122#post-14389381

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-648#post-13969760

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-122#post-14389381

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.831345/page-943#post-14461895

My favourite:



Rob Watts said:


> Optical... Don't be seduced to the dark side of RF noise...



There’s many more....


----------



## Nik74

Thank you so much for this @x RELIC x !
So the quest to find a good Optical source for my Qutest now begins ...


----------



## Nik74

VintageFlanker said:


> Ps: I hope you're using Roon feeding your Chromecast



I don’t have Roon... why is that important with Chromecast ?


----------



## VintageFlanker (Oct 23, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> I don’t have Roon... why is that important with Chromecast ?


Hum. Read this closely: https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ents-of-chromecast-audio-digital-output.4544/

I also did notice a significant improvement streaming Roon on CCA. Also, it can cast up to 24/92 flawless.


----------



## dc71

Nik74 said:


> Thank you so much for this @x RELIC x !
> So the quest to find a good Optical source for my Qutest now begins ...



I've used Bluesound Node2, SOTM sms200, Lumin D1 and now Lumin U1 Mini as sources for my Qutest. Sound-wise the Lumin U1M transport is my favourite, it gives you the choice of coax rca/BNC, USB or optical and is a fabulous match with Qutest.

If budget is tighter and you're only interested in optical, a used Node2 is a good option. With that I found that Lifatec glass toslink sounded better than plastic ones like QED performance optical into the Qutest - I have no idea why this is, I wasn't really expecting any difference.


----------



## jayz

dc71 said:


> Sound-wise the Lumin U1M transport is my favourite, it gives you the choice of coax rca/BNC, USB or optical and is a fabulous match with Qutest.



The lumin U1 mini spec says "Resamping to every supported format up to DSD128" which is a bit worrying because (if I understand it correctly) it does its own upsampling and that would potentially be in conflict with Qutest upsampling. 

Did you consider Auralic Aries Mini ? Curious to know how the U1M compares with it from a usability point of view i.e. App features and stability etc.

Anyway if we take an Aries Mini, stick an internal SSD, then connect to Qutest with optical, you have everything you need right there at 1/4 the price of the Lumin.


----------



## plinth (Oct 23, 2018)

sorry, moved to M Scaler thread


----------



## plsvn (Oct 23, 2018)

jayz said:


> The lumin U1 mini spec says "Resamping to every supported format up to DSD128" which is a bit worrying



just means you can upsample anything up to DSD128... *if you want to*


----------



## dc71

jayz said:


> The lumin U1 mini spec says "Resamping to every supported format up to DSD128" which is a bit worrying because (if I understand it correctly) it does its own upsampling and that would potentially be in conflict with Qutest upsampling.
> 
> Did you consider Auralic Aries Mini ? Curious to know how the U1M compares with it from a usability point of view i.e. App features and stability etc.
> 
> Anyway if we take an Aries Mini, stick an internal SSD, then connect to Qutest with optical, you have everything you need right there at 1/4 the price of the Lumin.



Lumin, Auralic Lightning DS and BluOS to me are the 3 best control apps/systems I've tried, take your pick they are all very good and Roon is an option for each. Lumin upsampling is completely optional and in the U1M, each output can be enabled/disabled as needed.

Aries mini is great value and on a par with the Node2. But after I tried the SOTM and Lumin D1 it was clear to me that a better transport makes a positive difference with Qutest in my system. Whether it's worth the extra cash to anyone else is a different matter, and for people who don't feel that the delta is audible/enough in their own system, I would advise to save the cash and be very happy with either of the Aries mini or Bluesound. Being realistic, any transport more expensive is definitely subject to the law of diminishing returns, but I do find that what feels like an extra 5-10% of technical sound quality/accuracy can have a seemingly greater effect on the perceived musical engagement, or the impression of live/natural sound from a recording.


----------



## Zzt231gr

plinth said:


> sorry, moved to M Scaler thread


Was it related to Qutest??


----------



## plinth

Zzt231gr said:


> Was it related to Qutest??


Qutest plus M Scaler so felt it best to pop it in the other thread.


----------



## Zzt231gr

plinth said:


> Qutest plus M Scaler so felt it best to pop it in the other thread.


I think it would be best if we could see it here,too!
I am not subscribed in the M thread because I am hoping for a Qutest range scaler!


----------



## plinth

I installed my M Scaler yesterday into my main headphone system consisting of



Sonore Ultra Rendu powered by Uptone LPS 1.2 power supply into M Scaler, into Qutest into Mjöinir Audio KGSSHV Carbon into Stax SR007 Mk2 electrostats.

I had never heard the Blu2 nor the HMS so I was really buying blind but I was fairly certain that if I could not discern a meaningful improvement then I would chalk another win upto audio hype and start seeing other DACs.

I plugged my Blue Jean Cable BNCs into the HMS, chose USB input, set the green filter on the Qutest and selected a random track on Roon and stabbed the input selector on the Qutest as it was not clear how to select the double data rate inputs. The random artist was Mary Chapin Carpenter and as soon as I heard her vice I went cold as I felt I was intruding on something intensely personal, such was the sense of intimacy added by the HMS. After thirty years of car sized upgrades it felt like I had been listening to bands from outside the club door and suddenly the door has opened and I have been thrust onto the stage.

The HMS seems to be playing music as opposed to playing hifi sound. The relationship is like that between cheese and onions and cheese and onion crisps; both are easily recognisable but manifestly not the same thing. I did try and use pass through mode but quickly went back onto full upscaling and decided not to try that again.

The convincing sense of timing makes music so much more interesting and engaging and it sounds delightful no matter how far behind of in front of the beat the artists are playing it is just more coherent and accessible.



This device is an astonishing upgrade and I have never made an upgrade that has had such an uplift in enjoyment.



So much of audiophilia is tinkering around the margins and suddenly here is something that is profoundly different. The Qutest M Scaler is such a potent package and kills the argument that all DACs sound alike


----------



## dawktah2

plinth said:


> I installed my M Scaler yesterday into my main headphone system consisting of
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think that settles it for me. I will probably sell my Qutest and get the TT 2.  I had wanted to get a single ended headphone pre-amp to pair with my Qutest but now hearing about the sound through the STAX I am going to invest in a electrostat energizer and use the TT 2 for single ended.  It will take me a few years since the next purchase after the TT 2 would be the mScaler.

Thanks for the review!


----------



## plinth

dawktah2 said:


> I think that settles it for me. I will probably sell my Qutest and get the TT 2.  I had wanted to get a single ended headphone pre-amp to pair with my Qutest but now hearing about the sound through the STAX I am going to invest in a electrostat energizer and use the TT 2 for single ended.  It will take me a few years since the next purchase after the TT 2 would be the mScaler.
> 
> Thanks for the review!



I wish that I could advise you but I have never heard the TT2 nor a DAVE for that matter. One of the principal distinguishing characteristics of the TT2 is the greatly increased power output allowing it to drive insensitive headphones or sensitive speakers without an amp. For electrostatics you are going to be using an energiser so the additional output power is not going to be a major factor. I would urge you to try the M scaler with your Qutest before you spend £4000 on a TT2. Where are you based, can you get to try these different combinations.


----------



## dawktah2

plinth said:


> I wish that I could advise you but I have never heard the TT2 nor a DAVE for that matter. One of the principal distinguishing characteristics of the TT2 is the greatly increased power output allowing it to drive insensitive headphones or sensitive speakers without an amp. For electrostatics you are going to be using an energiser so the additional output power is not going to be a major factor. I would urge you to try the M scaler with your Qutest before you spend £4000 on a TT2. Where are you based, can you get to try these different combinations.



I guess that's one of my issues, no local dealer closest is 200 miles away.


----------



## Ronsanut

plinth said:


> I installed my M Scaler yesterday into my main headphone system consisting of
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you for posting this review on your experience with the Qutest and MScaler.  I have a Qutest feeding my Blue Hawaii SE for my SR-009 and L700.  And also feeds my GS-X MKII for my dynamics and plannars.  I have an arrangement with my DAC vendor to return the Qutest once the Hugo TT2 comes out.  Then at a later date when I have the funds, I was going to buy the MScaler.  But listening to you, it seems the MScaler will make a bigger impact on SQ than just the upgrade from QuTest to TT2.  It would be great to hear from those now getting their TT2's to compare to the Qutest.  I also was looking forward to use all of my headphones in balanced mode feeding my amps's with the TT2, but maybe that can wait.

Well I now have pre-orders on both and will have to make a decision.  Hopefully soon!


----------



## Nik74 (Oct 23, 2018)

VintageFlanker said:


> Hum. Read this closely: https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ents-of-chromecast-audio-digital-output.4544/
> 
> I also did notice a significant improvement streaming Roon on CCA. Also, it can cast up to 24/92 flawless.



Thank you for the advice and the link. I didn't understand much of the technical details of this review but I got enough to figure it probably would sound better via Roon. So I signed up to the 14 day free trial.
Phew it sounds heaps better than CCA alone! Much more vibrant and alive, still with no glare. It does drop out a bit at 24/92 but a lot less frequently than CCA alone.

So, relating what I hear to what I understood from the linked technical CCA review , the Qutest could be a bit more immune to the terrible jitter of the CCA alone, but still manages to do a better job with a lower jitter signal via Roon/CCA. Works great for me.



dc71 said:


> I've used Bluesound Node2, SOTM sms200, Lumin D1 and now Lumin U1 Mini as sources for my Qutest. Sound-wise the Lumin U1M transport is my favourite, it gives you the choice of coax rca/BNC, USB or optical and is a fabulous match with Qutest.
> 
> If budget is tighter and you're only interested in optical, a used Node2 is a good option. With that I found that Lifatec glass toslink sounded better than plastic ones like QED performance optical into the Qutest - I have no idea why this is, I wasn't really expecting any difference.



Budget right now is quite tight so all I will stretch to is a good optical cable to see how much I could max out the current set up. In a few months I ll have to decide between a good server/streamer  that offers both USB and Toslink or an M-Scaler...


----------



## maxh22

Nik74 said:


> Thank you for the advice and the link. I didn't understand much of the technical details of this review but I got enough to figure it probably would sound better via Roon. So I signed up to the 14 day free trial.
> Phew it sounds heaps better than CCA alone! Much more vibrant and alive, still with no glare. It does drop out a bit at 24/92 but a lot less frequently than CCA alone.
> 
> So, relating what I hear to what I understood from the linked technical CCA review , the Qutest could be a bit more immune to the terrible jitter of the CCA alone, but still manages to do a better job with a lower jitter signal via Roon/CCA. Works great for me.
> ...



It’s true that CCA sounds better with Roon and my I have a suspicion that the Chroemcast protocol just like the Air Play Protocol isn’t entirely transparent in its audio path. I always got the feeling that the timber was a little bland or metallic sounding and although it sounded very clear the sound came across as a little light and lacking in mass; especially compared to the optical out from my MSI laptop.

You should get better sound and low end using a micro usb to Ethernet converter and also running the CCA on an portable power bank will increase refinement.


----------



## maxh22

PS: If you don’t have a close by router I recommend using or purchasing a  wireless repeater which can serve as a WiFi to Ethernet converter and in my experience it sounds much better than streaming using an internal WiFi card or even a WiFi dongle.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 23, 2018)

hi everyone, I hope to get some answers as I am not good in technical things

my setup is

alienware laptop 15 R3--- chord qutest---- usb---- ifi ican pro amp---- headphones ( Hifiman He1000 V2 )

1- I read some people talk about noisy usb signal , is there anything you guys recommend to buy within ( 300 - 500 usd ) to get the best signal form my laptop to the chord
2- do you advise I buy certain usb cables ( 200 usd -300 usd )
3- how bout interconnects form my dac to amp, I am using a cheap audioquest interconnect that costs only 30 usd , i can not remember its name
4- do you believe using a mac mini would be better to use than my alienware
5- finally in the media players, I see wasapi and asio options which one to use, and do u change any of the driver settings , please share

i know all these are noob questions, but i would like to know about how to get to a better level of signal transfer


----------



## gad1

Rob Watts,

Regarding USA Warranty:

Would you please state the terms of
the Chord Qutest 3 yr. warranty if
Qutest is purchased from authorized
USA distributor.  If a warranty repair
is necessary is the repair actually
done in the USA by the distributor,
or does the distributor send it to
England, or is it a matter of the
distributors discretion?  In the event
that a repair can not be satisfactorily
performed by the authorized dist.
is Chord responsible for resolving
the issue; eg. purchaser sends dac
directly to Chord England if auth.
dist. is out of business or lack
technical ability to perform repair?

Sorry to bother you with this but
warranty is part of the purchasing
decision and I am currently
evaluating a Qutest on a trial
basis.

regards,

gad-


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> hi everyone, I hope to get some answers as I am not good in technical things
> 
> my setup is
> 
> ...


You should check Ifi Galvanic 3.0 with idefender + Ipower along with Curious Usb cable which is little over 300. If you combine these products im dead certain you get very analog, vivid and real sound.


----------



## Sound Eq

Arniesb said:


> You should check Ifi Galvanic 3.0 with idefender + Ipower along with Curious Usb cable which is little over 300. If you combine these products im dead certain you get very analog, vivid and real sound.



wow thats lots of things, but i think I need to look into this so for the ipower shall buy one for the dac and amp as well


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> wow thats lots of things, but i think I need to look into this so for the ipower shall buy one for the dac and amp as well


Yes it's a lot but its proven. Ifi galvanic have Ultimate Galvanic isolation which cancels mains noise and other stuff, have reclocking, restoring, noise suppressing. Cable pick up ton of noise too + Curious with Silver conductor and separated power line are basically Everything that will kill all the noise and digital sound and replace it with analong and vinyl quality sound.


----------



## Nik74 (Oct 23, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> You should get better sound and low end using a micro usb to Ethernet converter



I m not sure I understand, Where would I connect the Usb and the ethernet ? If you re refering to the Chromecast , it doesn't make sense to me - possibly for lack of technical understanding


----------



## maxh22

Nik74 said:


> I m not sure I understand, Where would I connect the Usb and the ethernet ? If you re refering to the Chromecast , it doesn't make sense to me - possibly for lack of technical understanding



This is the adapter to get Ethernet working with chrome cast:

Snowpink Ethernet Adapter for Fire TV Stick (2nd GEN), All-New Fire TV (2017), Chrom... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07DJ756NM/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_c_api_M94ZBbSGAQXMQ

For the usb I would recommend hooking it up to a power bank / portable battery.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 23, 2018)

Arniesb said:


> Yes it's a lot but its proven. Ifi galvanic have Ultimate Galvanic isolation which cancels mains noise and other stuff, have reclocking, restoring, noise suppressing. Cable pick up ton of noise too + Curious with Silver conductor and separated power line are basically Everything that will kill all the noise and digital sound and replace it with analong and vinyl quality sound.



so how do u connect all these things to each other, can you tell me how the connection sequence would be


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> so how do u connect all these things to each other, can you tell me how the connection sequence would be


Actually i dont Have Ifi galvanic, but have Nano usb 3.0. Ofcourse i will buy Ifi Galvanic later. It should be i think like this -  Idefender + ipower to Igalvanic and then To Dac. More info you can find on Ifi forums.
In my system ifi nano usb + shielded cable helped tremendously, so now i ordered Wireworld Platinum starlight 7 to get best when it comes to fighting digital sound and getting cleanest sound.
Yes great dacs sound awesome, but they not gonna clean all the mess from noisy power lines and radio frequencies contaminated sound.


----------



## Sound Eq

Arniesb said:


> Actually i dont Have Ifi galvanic, but have Nano usb 3.0. Ofcourse i will buy Ifi Galvanic later. It should be i think like this -  Idefender + ipower to Igalvanic and then To Dac. More info you can find on Ifi forums.
> In my system ifi nano usb + shielded cable helped tremendously, so now i ordered Wireworld Platinum starlight 7 to get best when it comes to fighting digital sound and getting cleanest sound.
> Yes great dacs sound awesome, but they not gonna clean all the mess from noisy power lines and radio frequencies contaminated sound.



the starlight is way above my intention to spend, just curious using what you mentioned, in what way did you really feel those improved things with your qutest, as I am not in what is ideal on paper but not translated into real sound quality difference


----------



## SoundeScapes

Sound Eq said:


> hi everyone, I hope to get some answers as I am not good in technical things
> 
> my setup is
> 
> ...



It's always difficult to advise on specific products in audio, especially cables.
IMO USB cables do make a difference and I use a cable with the power cable separated from the data myself
so I'm sure the Curious cable is probably a good one.
I have never tried regenerators or reclockers myself and I know Rob has advised against them.

To try something pretty simple and cheap to start with I would recommend:

1a, AQ Jitterbug. It cleans up some of the noise. Made a difference for me.
1b, Ferrites. I know it's almost a banned word in here but I decided to try myself after all the buzz and 
 even though I'm not done testing yet I really feel most of the harshness I still experienced is now gone.
2, A cable I found to have really good performance/price ratio when testing a few years ago is AQ Cinnamon.
 I thought it sounded really good at the time and was the 2nd best and the cost is ~$70 (compared to at least $340 for Curious for example).

5, I have not experimented much with different media players or driver settings but what you can do is to read through
 Highend-AudioPC's free optimization guide: https://www.highend-audiopc.com/PDF/audiophile-optimizer-setup-guide.pdf
 and try some of it. BIOS settings, USB software settings etc.

Even though I think that using a Linear PSU improved SQ for me slightly, in a speaker setup, I cannot recommend it because 
I'm not sure the improvement matches the cost.

All the above IMHO


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> the starlight is way above my intention to spend, just curious using what you mentioned, in what way did you really feel those improved things with your qutest, as I am not in what is ideal on paper but not translated into real sound quality difference


I dont tell you to buy The most expensive cable. I just sayin that difference is so big for me when it comes to usb cables so i go for the best. Curious is very very good  for the price. It have Everything you need... Siver, good shielding and separated power line.
P.S i would stay clear of Audioquest Usb Cables. They all are overhyped by people who didnt heard better ones...
I Have Aq Forest and it have nothing going to fight noise and it sound extremely boring, digital, harsh and lifeless. They have nothing to fight noise, High frequency inferfence.
Aq Jitterbug is absolutely worst buy i ever did and it actually degrade sound... Making it slow, Veiled, extremely forward, lackin air and Soundstage.
I dont know how Ifi Usb solutions can make sound worse, cause that it do is Restore signal, Kill noise. Qutest sounded  so much better with My nano usb 3.0 than alone when tried it with my dealer.


----------



## VintageFlanker

I don't think any extra usb "thing" may clean or improve the Qutest USB input... This is the best USB treatment I ever tested on any DAC. Period. 

I quote myself (many months ago) what I wrote about the Qutest's galvanic isolation :



VintageFlanker said:


> It's not.
> 
> Trust me, I owned MANY DACs these lasts years and almost all of them took, more or less, audible noise from my computer via the USB input (worst case: Nuprime DAC-9). This noise was very audible in my MA Silver 10 tweeters, less with headphones.
> 
> The Qutest is DEAD SILENT pluged in USB on my system, and this is the first DAC I own to work that way.


----------



## SoundeScapes

Arniesb said:


> I dont tell you to buy The most expensive cable. I just sayin that difference is so big for me when it comes to usb cables so i go for the best. Curious is very very good  for the price. It have Everything you need... Siver, good shielding and separated power line.
> P.S i would stay clear of Audioquest Usb Cables. They all are overhyped by people who didnt heard better ones...
> I Have Aq Forest and it have nothing going to fight noise and it sound extremely boring, digital, harsh and lifeless. They have nothing to fight noise, High frequency inferfence.
> Aq Jitterbug is absolutely worst buy i ever did and it actually degrade sound... Making it slow, Veiled, extremely forward, lackin air and Soundstage.
> I dont know how Ifi Usb solutions can make sound worse, cause that it do is Restore signal, Kill noise. Qutest sounded  so much better with My nano usb 3.0 than alone when tried it with my dealer.




YMWV obviously. I have heard different cables and still think that AQ's are well built, good sounding cables
and for the reasonable price the Cinnamon is good.
In a perfect world with a perfect source you shouldn't need a Jitterbug, or reclockers, or regenerators etc.
I have read different opinions on the Jitterbug and I'm sure it all depends on surrounding equipment, electrical environment,
preferences etc but for me it was an improvement with a noisy source.
Now just recently, after some changes to source and other things, I've removed the Jitterbug and cannot detect a difference anymore.


----------



## jwbrent

VintageFlanker said:


> I don't think any extra usb "thing" may clean or improve the Qutest USB input... This is the best USB treatment I ever tested on any DAC. Period.
> 
> I quote myself (many months ago) what I wrote about the Qutest's galvanic isolation :



Same here, dead quiet using my MacBook Air to the Qutest with a Penon Audio pure silver USB cable.


----------



## Rob Watts

gad1 said:


> Rob Watts,
> 
> Regarding USA Warranty:
> 
> ...



I am actually independent of Chord, as I am merely the designer, so this is by no means an official answer.

But my understanding is that warranty repairs are handled via Chord's US service centre, organised by your dealer. Chord monitor the situation, and provide the ultimate back-stop. Most repairs are easy to fix; some require brand new boards for which the service centre install. I do know that Chord take looking after customers wherever you are in the world very seriously, and have seen them bending over backwards to sort issues out.


----------



## plsvn (Oct 24, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> have seen them bending over backwards to sort issues out.



btw, and OT... have an “early” Mojo (S# on sticker). it runs really hot (but back then Chord said it is nothing to worry about)
though a friend bought one recently (“engraved” S#) and... it only gets “warm-ish”

should I contact Chord?


----------



## Hi Rez

Sound Eq said:


> hi everyone, I hope to get some answers as I am not good in technical things
> 
> my setup is
> 
> ...



For improving the USB signal you could try the UpTone Audio ISO Regen.  The iFi products could offer similar improvements, but I don't have experience with those.  The ISO Regen is in your price range, has a 30 day money back guarantee, so at most you are out shipping if it doesn't make a noticeable improvement for you.  It would likely still offer improvements should you at some point in the future change your source.  This might be your most cost effective improvement. 

Regarding USB cables, I would second the suggestion for the AudioQuest Cinnamon.  There are better cables out there, but the cost of the Cinnamon is reasonable compared to the super expensive cables.  And unless you are in a "cost no object" quest, IMO you'll get a bigger improvement for the money with something like the ISO Regen above than with a USB cable. Maybe look at source and USB cleanup before going down this rabbit hole.

Source matters.  A stock Mac mini might be an improvement.  A Mac mini with SSD, modified to use a linear power supply would be an improvement, but at a non-trivial cost.  A dedicated server / renderer would almost certainly offer a noticeable improvement, but also at a cost. 

Interconnects IMO would offer the least improvement for the $$.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 24, 2018)

Hi Rez said:


> For improving the USB signal you could try the UpTone Audio ISO Regen.  The iFi products could offer similar improvements, but I don't have experience with those.  The ISO Regen is in your price range, has a 30 day money back guarantee, so at most you are out shipping if it doesn't make a noticeable improvement for you.  It would likely still offer improvements should you at some point in the future change your source.  This might be your most cost effective improvement.
> 
> Regarding USB cables, I would second the suggestion for the AudioQuest Cinnamon.  There are better cables out there, but the cost of the Cinnamon is reasonable compared to the super expensive cables.  And unless you are in a "cost no object" quest, IMO you'll get a bigger improvement for the money with something like the ISO Regen above than with a USB cable. Maybe look at source and USB cleanup before going down this rabbit hole.
> 
> ...



this looks interesting as well, now I have another question, since my laptop has only 2 usb ports, and I am connecting many usb devices to my laptop, using a usb hub, is there a good quality usb hub that I should buy with the regen, or it doesn't matter with the regen as it does all the work regardless what usb hub i use on my laptop

to ask more precisely can i connect 4 usb devices ( 2 external storage devices and 1 dac and 1 mouse ) to a usb hub and still use regen to achieve what it is supposed to achieve


----------



## Hi Rez

Sound Eq said:


> this looks interesting as well, now I have another question, since my laptop has only 2 usb ports, and I am connecting many usb devices to my laptop, using a usb hub, is there a good quality usb hub that I should buy with the regen, or it doesn't matter with the regen as it does all the work regardless what usb hub i use on my laptop
> 
> to ask more precisely can i connect 4 usb devices ( 2 external storage devices and 1 dac and 1 mouse ) to a usb hub and still use regen to achieve what it is supposed to achieve


No experience using hubs, so can't speak to it.  Would suggest you use one usb port for the regen / dac, and connect everything else to the other port via the hub.  This would minimize any potential effect of the hub on your music.


----------



## Sound Eq (Oct 24, 2018)

Hi Rez said:


> No experience using hubs, so can't speak to it.  Would suggest you use one usb port for the regen / dac, and connect everything else to the other port via the hub.  This would minimize any potential effect of the hub on your music.



thanks for all replies, this got me interested really, i would like to ask few more questions, suing the regen what difference did you notice with headphones as I mainly want it to use with my headphones. So assuming I buy this regen and just buy a cheap usb cable like audioquest cinnamon would suffice as a usb cable, as all the work I assume will be done by the regen

also do i have to buy a power supply for it, if yes why the sell it without a power supply? Do i have to buy the ifi ipower for it ?

finally did anyone hear about audioquest columbia as locally there is a guy selling it for cheap

I am trying to minimize costs as much as possible, and I really would like to spend 400 -500 usd max, and get in return something to make me feel there is a  difference that I can experience while listening, not just something that is barely barely noticeable, as that expenditure can go to better places in that case. Yes I know its only 500 usd but that is what I feel at the moment willing to spend on. 

Thanks all for tolerating these questions, if anyone asks me do i hear noise, I would say not at all, and do I feel I am missing something, i would say no. But if investing max 500 usd would take it to a better audible level then why not, I really do not want to pay 500 usd just for theoretical experiences


----------



## Hi Rez

Sound Eq said:


> thanks for all replies, this got me interested really, i would like to ask few more questions, suing the regen what difference did you notice with headphones as I mainly want it to use with my headphones. So assuming I buy this regen and just buy a cheap usb cable like audioquest cinnamon would suffice as a usb cable, as all the work I assume will be done by the regen
> 
> also do i have to buy a power supply for it, if yes why the sell it without a power supply? Do i have to buy the ifi ipower for it ?
> 
> ...


PM sent


----------



## Sound Eq

Hi Rez said:


> PM sent


thanks alot for the detailed answers


----------



## gad1

Rob Watts said:


> I am actually independent of Chord, as I am merely the designer, so this is by no means an official answer.
> 
> But my understanding is that warranty repairs are handled via Chord's US service centre, organised by your dealer. Chord monitor the situation, and provide the ultimate back-stop. Most repairs are easy to fix; some require brand new boards for which the service centre install. I do know that Chord take looking after customers wherever you are in the world very seriously, and have seen them bending over backwards to sort issues out.



Thank you Rob.

gad-


----------



## marcusd

Hi, Guys, we finished our review of the Qutest. I found some slight differences in the sound compared to the Hugo 2 DAC but overall just as detailed and excellent sounding DAC

https://headfonics.com/2018/10/chord-qutest-review/


----------



## VintageFlanker

Welcome... back, Qutest. 




 

This is my second unit as my first didn't match very well with my (sold) Peachtree Nova 300.

Now, with my Denon PMA-2500NE... Need more days to listen but seems promising so far!


----------



## Christer (Oct 25, 2018)

marcusd said:


> Hi, Guys, we finished our review of the Qutest. I found some slight differences in the sound compared to the Hugo 2 DAC but overall just as detailed and excellent sounding DAC
> 
> https://headfonics.com/2018/10/chord-qutest-review/


Nice review although as usual from most of you guys I miss references to the music you used in your comparisons!
Why is that so difficult?
Anyway it seems we   generally agree you and me regarding HUGO 2 and Qutest.
I chose Qutest after careful comparisons with some of my reference hi res classical  music files for a couple of reasons.
HUGO 2 could not drive my HEKV2 well enough, not to mention the Susvara I listened to also via both DACs.
And although HUGO2 would have been a smarter choice for my travels I am actually "mad enough" to use  Qutest also as my travel DAC in combination with a choice of headphone amps with more power for power-hungry  headphones.
I refuse to stick  any of those "weird looking little thingies" many here seems to be using, in my ear canals for  my serious music listening and will only do so  on flights for watching movies.
But I also chose Qutest for home use in my  speaker based system and because to me and with the same actual references to the  live sound, tracks mentioned above, Qutest sounded better and more real in almost all respects to me.
Next I am going to see/hear more in depth than my so far short tests, how much of an improvement M-scaler will really  add to Qutest's already quite  good capablities.
Cheers Christer


----------



## marcusd (Oct 25, 2018)

Christer said:


> Nice review although as usual from most of you guys I miss references to the music you used in your comparisons!
> Why is that so difficult?
> Anyway it seems we   generally agree you and me regarding HUGO 2 and Qutest.
> I chose Qutest after careful comparisons with some of my reference hi res classical  music files for a couple of reasons.
> ...



It doesn't make a lick of difference what music you process through the DAC, it will still have the same performance and still sound the exact same. We do tend to say how suitable certain gear is for genres but ultimately the amp on the end is going to be the final arbitrator.

Lol.. nice one taking the qutest on your travels, you using a power bank? I have a 20000mah one I am considering testing with the qutest when I get a chance. I like scalers but some of the ones I have tried sounded a touch digital beyond 96k so hoping the M-Scaler bucks the trend.

Yup speaker systems will greatly benefit from the Qutest, you should hear it with the TToby - magical!


----------



## Christer

marcusd said:


> It doesn't make a lick of difference what music you process through the DAC, it will still have the same performance and still sound the exact same. We do tend to say how suitable certain gear is for genres but ultimately the amp on the end is going to be the final arbitrator.
> 
> Lol.. nice one taking the qutest on your travels, you using a power bank? I have a 20000mah one I am considering testing with the qutest when I get a chance. I like scalers but some of the ones I have tried sounded a touch digital beyond 96k so hoping the M-Scaler bucks the trend.
> 
> Yup speaker systems will greatly benefit from the Qutest, you should hear it with the TToby - magical!



Hi,
No I am not yet using my Qutest with a powerbank .But I am looking into getting one for this winter in Asia.
I hope the HIFI guys in Singapore will know what will both work well with Qutest and get me past Security without problems at Airports.
As far as Quetest via speakers is concerned it still lags slightly behind the best of my direct cut vinyl via my big electrostatic speakers and 900 watts per channel amplification.
That's where maybe an M-scaler could close the gap?
On the other hand and as you and at least one BLU2 owner  mention, and  judging  from my first trials of Qutest and BLU2 earlier this year there could be some "digital glare" issues hinted at during my first trials.
If I am going to add an M-scaler  to my Qutest it will have to  justify the considerable outlay needed ,very well indeed, before a penny cruncher like me  lets go of his hard earned money.
As far as I am concerned it is  not enough if it can only  pull 16/44.1 rbcd into hi res territory.

Cheers Christer


----------



## marcusd

Christer said:


> Hi,
> No I am not yet using my Qutest with a powerbank .But I am looking into getting one for this winter in Asia.
> I hope the HIFI guys in Singapore will know what will both work well with Qutest and get me past Security without problems at Airports.
> As far as Quetest via speakers is concerned it still lags slightly behind the best of my direct cut vinyl via my big electrostatic speakers and 900 watts per channel amplification.
> ...



I am hearing positive reports on investing in a good linear power supply from MCRU. Not cheap but since you are going summit-fi with your gear might be worth looking into.


----------



## AlexB73

marcusd said:


> I am hearing positive reports on investing in a good linear power supply from MCRU. Not cheap but since you are going summit-fi with your gear might be worth looking into.


I had a very bad experience with MCRU power supply and 2Qute.
This power supply totally killed sound of 2Qute, made it sound very odd with glassy high frequency, bloated mid base.


----------



## marcusd

AlexB73 said:


> I had a very bad experience with MCRU power supply and 2Qute.
> This power supply totally killed sound of 2Qute, made it sound very odd with glassy high frequency, bloated mid base.



ouch! that ended that thought quickly lol.. any other recommendations?


----------



## AlexB73

marcusd said:


> ouch! that ended that thought quickly lol.. any other recommendations?


I believe a better power supply for 2qute is exist for sure.
But I understand that I can't believe to opinion of other people. (Most of people perceive positively every upgrade even if it makes sound worse.)
So, I don't have enough money and time for my own research and I like 2qute sound with the power supply supplied by Chord.
You need to understand that Chord devices sound very good with own power supplies and power supply upgrade IS NOT MUST!


----------



## veeceeem

AlexB73 said:


> I believe a better power supply for 2qute is exist for sure.
> But I understand that I can't believe to opinion of other people. (Most of people perceive positively every upgrade even if it makes sound worse.)
> So, I don't have enough money and time for my own research and I like 2qute sound with the power supply supplied by Chord.
> You need to understand that Chord devices sound very good with own power supplies and power supply upgrade IS NOT MUST!


Fun fact: some buy a DAC because of how good it sound, then try their hardest just to change that  I believe if there were a better solution/adapter, Chord would just include it with Qutest or sell it separately. The fact that RW only mentioned a battery bank for traveling without mentioning if it brings changes to sound or not - somehow proves that the included adapter really meet his expectation


----------



## Nik74 (Oct 26, 2018)

I can unreservedly recommend the one that comes free in the box. If it is good enough for Rob Watts, it must be good enough  

Chord could so easily design and sell expensive power supplies for their products  as an upgrade if they deemed it necessary  like so many other manufacturers do, I m glad they haven’t gone down that route. And I m sure they have good reasons not to. I find it quite honourable specially bearing in mind that it would have been particularly lucrative ...


----------



## VintageFlanker (Oct 26, 2018)

IMHO, there's nothing to discuss here.

If some PSU would make the Qutest sound better, Chord would know about it. As they claim it won't improve anything, it won't improve anything. Period.

There is NOTHING to gain for Chord to claim such things if it wasn't real. Don't you think their ultimate purpose is to sell the best product for the money?

Sorry, but I tend to trust engineers more than audiophiles...


----------



## ATXKyle

VintageFlanker said:


> IMHO, there's nothing to discuss here.
> 
> If some PSU would make the Qutest sound better, Chord would know about it. As they claim it won't improve anything, it won't improve anything. Period.
> 
> ...



Don't want to get into a PSUs debate but just want to provide an alternate viewpoint from someone who's actually tried it.  I'm a 2Qute owner and my experience is that upgrading the power supply (in my case to an Uptone LPS1.2) unequivocally and pretty dramatically improved the sound.  Was VERY happy with the upgrade.  It's important to have the digital source feeding your DAC on clean power as well.  Filtering in the DAC helps a lot but can only do so much ...


----------



## ATXKyle

marcusd said:


> ouch! that ended that thought quickly lol.. any other recommendations?


Uptone LPS1.2


----------



## Hi Rez

ATXKyle said:


> Uptone LPS1.2


+1


----------



## Triode User

ATXKyle said:


> Don't want to get into a PSUs debate but just want to provide an alternate viewpoint from someone who's actually tried it.  I'm a 2Qute owner and my experience is that upgrading the power supply (in my case to an Uptone LPS1.2) unequivocally and pretty dramatically improved the sound.  Was VERY happy with the upgrade.  It's important to have the digital source feeding your DAC on clean power as well.  Filtering in the DAC helps a lot but can only do so much ...



It would be very useful if you could describe the change in the sound due to adding the power supply on account of one mans improvement being another mans worsening. Thanks.


----------



## Nik74

It is becoming clear to me that different people will want to tune the sound of their DAC towards slightly different signature directions. And what often feels like an improvement may be more equanimously and accurately described as a difference. 
The bottom line could be whether that difference in sound enhances your enjoyment and what you perceive as musical involvement. 
I am in no position to disagree with anyone who likes a bit of added RF light and clarity when I get chills down my spine by two valve amps chained together adding their flavour of second degree harmonics and voluptuousness to my otherwise “incisively neutral” Qutest 
I hope you re all enjoying your music this eve


----------



## Triode User (Oct 28, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> It is becoming clear to me that different people will want to tune the sound of their DAC towards slightly different signature directions. And what often feels like an improvement may be more equanimously and accurately described as a difference.
> The bottom line could be whether that difference in sound enhances your enjoyment and what you perceive as musical involvement.
> I am in no position to disagree with anyone who likes a bit of added RF light and clarity when I get chills down my spine by two valve amps chained together adding their flavour of second degree harmonics and voluptuousness to my otherwise “incisively neutral” Qutest
> I hope you re all enjoying your music this eve



I am with you up to a point and I say this as a lover of the valve amp sound, distortion and all. I have had valve amps for maybe 40 years and they do send that tingle down my spine even though I know it is often distortion. The thing is though that it is relatively benign distortion. And that is the difference between valve amp distortion and RF noise distortion. One is pleasing to the ear and the other is harsh noise that makes me for one want to turn the hifi off. (Listening  to Agnes Obel, Aventine - HiRes version, simple and sublime music, I love that deep gravely cello sound)


----------



## Sound Eq

can I ask what is the difference in sound when you use 2 V or 3 V, assuming there is any, I hook up my qutest to ifi pro ican using USB


----------



## jwbrent

Sound Eq said:


> can I ask what is the difference in sound when you use 2 V or 3 V, assuming there is any, I hook up my qutest to ifi pro ican using USB



2V is a pretty standard output for home source products, hence, preamps, integrated amps, etc. are designed for this input level. I had to switch my Qutest from the default 3V to 2V because it was overloading my Luxman amp. Even in cases where 3V doesn’t cause this type of problem, the volume adjustment on the connected device loses its fineness of adjustment; small adjustments bring bigger changes in volume level.

With that said, some feel a higher output gives a more authoritive sound, a more dynamic sound. It really depends on the output impedance and input impedance/sensitivity of the connected devices.


----------



## Sound Eq

jwbrent said:


> 2V is a pretty standard output for home source products, hence, preamps, integrated amps, etc. are designed for this input level. I had to switch my Qutest from the default 3V to 2V because it was overloading my Luxman amp. Even in cases where 3V doesn’t cause this type of problem, the volume adjustment on the connected device loses its fineness of adjustment; small adjustments bring bigger changes in volume level.
> 
> With that said, some feel a higher output gives a more authoritive sound, a more dynamic sound. It really depends on the output impedance and input impedance/sensitivity of the connected devices.



so by default its was 3V, if yes then I am sure chord chose it to be default for a reason, don't you think so ?


----------



## marcusd

Sound Eq said:


> so by default its was 3V, if yes then I am sure chord chose it to be default for a reason, don't you think so ?



The default setting is 1V and is chosen simply because the lowest value is the safest value electrically out of the box.


----------



## plsvn

marcusd said:


> default setting is 1V



default, OTB, is 3v. same as it was (but fixed) for 2Qute


----------



## Sound Eq

marcusd said:


> The default setting is 1V and is chosen simply because the lowest value is the safest value electrically out of the box.



i thought so as well, as I saw it red when I first fired it up, but then forget if it was really red or blue on first day of purchase, thanks for confirming it was 1V and I choose to go with 2 V


----------



## Sound Eq

plsvn said:


> default, OTB, is 3v. same as it was (but fixed) for 2Qute



i think it was 1 V


----------



## plsvn

Sound Eq said:


> i think it was 1 V



mine, first time I turned it on, was set to 3v. then I lowered it to 2v


----------



## Ilias9001

Mine was 1v out of the box, and i thought wait, that is too quiet. Took me a couple of minutes to realise it even though i obviously knew about the variable output.


----------



## marcusd

plsvn said:


> default, OTB, is 3v. same as it was (but fixed) for 2Qute


Interesting so not everyone had a default 1v out of the box.


----------



## plsvn

marcusd said:


> Interesting so not everyone had a default 1v out of the box.



or, maybe, the dealer had already "tested/demoed" my unit 
(they only got two, back then)


----------



## Sound Eq

plsvn said:


> or, maybe, the dealer had already "tested/demoed" my unit
> (they only got two, back then)


that's more likely


----------



## Nik74

Mine was at 3v out of the box. I switched to 1v to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of my set up but a few days ago I settled to 2v.


----------



## nephilim32

I have my Qutest set at 3v .My Burson solist SL needs a bit of help when driving the Hd 800's and when i play non loudness war victimized recordings .
A great set up .


----------



## nephilim32

marcusd said:


> Interesting so not everyone had a default 1v out of the box.



Yeah. It is true .Mine was set at 2v. I thought that was the default setting but the 3v is much better for my particular set up.


----------



## jwbrent

Sound Eq said:


> so by default its was 3V, if yes then I am sure chord chose it to be default for a reason, don't you think so ?



As I mentioned, it depends on the gear. Perhaps Chord’s preamps work best with a 3V input signal.

Choose the one since it’s easy enough to do that works best for you.


----------



## jwbrent

Clearly, some of the Qutests were factory set to other than 3V. No big deal, choose the one that works best in your setup.


----------



## GreenBow

I read a scary post in this thread. Someone said that the Qutest suffered from losing the first half second of music sometimes. However that was fixed a while ago, and before the Qutest would have into production I think. It was primarily on USB I think.

My Mojo does it. However that was long before Hugo 2 and Qutest. My Hugo 2 does not do it. ......... Please could someone put my mind at rest. Or does the Qutest need software that inserts silence to allow for hardware synchronisation on USB. .. Personally I can not imaging that it's true.


----------



## jwbrent

GreenBow said:


> I read a scary post in this thread. Someone said that the Qutest suffered from losing the first half second of music sometimes. However that was fixed a while ago, and before the Qutest would have into production I think. It was primarily on USB I think.
> 
> My Mojo does it. However that was long before Hugo 2 and Qutest. My Hugo 2 does not do it. ......... Please could someone put my mind at rest. Or does the Qutest need software that inserts silence to allow for hardware synchronisation on USB. .. Personally I can not imaging that it's true.



I had the original Hugo and still own a Mojo, so the muting you describe really annoyed me. My Qutest has shown no signs of this. I bought mine about 3-4 months ago.


----------



## jwbrent

I use the USB input.


----------



## GreenBow (Oct 28, 2018)

jwbrent said:


> I had the original Hugo and still own a Mojo, so the muting you describe really annoyed me. My Qutest has shown no signs of this. I bought mine about 3-4 months ago.



Thank you.

The muting was because the DAC just set off and didn't wait for hardware synchronisation. My Meridian Explorer waited for sync before starting playing. Chord altered their design and do that now.

I assumed the Qutest would be right and wait for hardware sync. ... On my Mojo I worked around with JRiver. It allows us to insert some silence to allow for hardware sync. The Chord DACs did it that way, muting, to prevent pops and such, as sampling frequency changed from no music to music. I am really happy that Chord changed their way over this.

I know the Hugo 2 works fine. I have turned off the half second of silence in JRiver. The Hugo 2 never clips the start of tracks. Plus Rob Watts told me it was fixed. (I just got scared because someone mentioned it in this thread, and I think in relation to the Qutest. I am sure they said the Qutest was doing it, and I found it hard to believe.)


----------



## jwbrent

Me, too!


----------



## GreenBow

I hope I didn't sound patronising, by rattling on about why the earlier Chord DACs cut half a second. .. I think I was just in auto-pilot mode.

\------------

Anyway I found this on the Moon Audio review of the Qutest, about PSUs with Qutest.

*Much like the 2Qute, we don't recommend spending money on an external linear power supply. We found no improvements with the 2Qute and since the Qutest now uses a USB Micro B style input for power we don't see many options available for or improvements from adding external linear power. We do recommend using Chord's supplied "wall wart" which needs 5v and at least 2.1amps. Moon Audio sells extra USB Power supplies if you need a second for another location.
*
https://www.moon-audio.com/blog/chord-qutest-review/


----------



## plsvn

GreenBow said:


> needs 5v and at least 2.1amps



Rob wrote in this very thread 1A is more than enough


----------



## Sound Eq

plsvn said:


> Rob wrote in this very thread 1A is more than enough



so the one that came with qutest was it 1A


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2 (Oct 29, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> Yes, that’s correct. See below...


i just purchased the qutest to use with my woo audio wa6se and audeze lcd3 and have been reading that this dac is not really for headphone use
what the hell man i wish i read these pages earlier i had no clue .
is it really that bad with headphones?. what now i have to sell it .


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

i just purchased the qutest to use with my woo audio wa6se and audeze lcd3 and have been reading that this dac is not really for headphone use 
what the hell man i wish i read these pages earlier i had no clue .
is it really that bad with headphones?.


----------



## marcusd

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> i just purchased the qutest to use with my woo audio wa6se and audeze lcd3 and have been reading that this dac is not really for headphone use
> what the hell man i wish i read these pages earlier i had no clue .
> is it really that bad with headphones?.



Quite the opposite, you have a stellar amp and headphones so it will sound top notch with your setup.


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

rob watts said himself that is was designed for speakers primarily and you lose transparency i  was gutted when i read that i only purchased it yesterday lol
so you think it will be ok .


----------



## marcusd

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> rob watts said himself that is was designed for speakers primarily and you lose transparency i  was gutted when i read that i only purchased it yesterday lol
> so you think it will be ok .



I just reviewed it using headphones and a class A solid state amp and a SET Auris amp and its perfect for me. Certainly better than a few other DAC's I have tried.


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

marcusd said:


> I just reviewed it using headphones and a class A solid state amp and a SET Auris amp and its perfect for me. Certainly better than a few other DAC's I have tried.


thats put my mind at ease a little but i cant help thinking that i could of put my money elsewere on another dac like the schiit bifrost or something but il check it out and compare it to the schiit bifrost.


----------



## x RELIC x

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> i just purchased the qutest to use with my woo audio wa6se and audeze lcd3 and have been reading that this dac is not really for headphone use
> what the hell man i wish i read these pages earlier i had no clue .
> is it really that bad with headphones?. what now i have to sell it .



No, you don’t have to sell it. Of course the Qutest will work fine if you want to use your headphone amp. The context seems to have been lost in my quote you referenced.


----------



## Sound Eq

x RELIC x said:


> No, you don’t have to sell it. Of course the Qutest will work fine if you want to use your headphone amp. The context seems to have been lost in my quote you referenced.



i like the qutest with my hifiman he1000 v2 and ifi ican pro, but would like to know the context in how it was mentioned


----------



## x RELIC x

Sound Eq said:


> i like the qutest with my hifiman he1000 v2 and ifi ican pro, but would like to know the context in how it was mentioned



Rob is a fan of transparency and his own work therefore he recommends the Hugo2 over the Qutest+amp for driving headphones. That doesn’t mean the Qutest will be terrible with headphones through a seperate amp depending on an individual’s tastes or preference for an external headphone amp, as @Nicholasheadfi2 concluded in his post.


----------



## Keisuk3

Very interested in this little guy as the replacement to my theta.


----------



## GreenBow

Keisuk3 said:


> Very interested in this little guy as the replacement to my theta.



I would not hesitate if I were you. It's the class leader. However I have no idea what your 'theta' is.

If you do buy the Qutest, I have seen some say, give it a week to settle down.


----------



## Keisuk3

GreenBow said:


> I would not hesitate if I were you. It's the class leader. However I have no idea what your 'theta' is.
> 
> If you do buy the Qutest, I have seen some say, give it a week to settle down.



Ah I have a Theta Ds Pro Basic 3a, basicaly the closest you can get to a Gen V without Gen V pricing.


----------



## GreenBow

Keisuk3 said:


> Ah I have a Theta Ds Pro Basic 3a, basicaly the closest you can get to a Gen V without Gen V pricing.



Ahh, I think I came across Theta from another Head Fier. Aren't they another company that uses FPGA?

I have the Hugo 2 and it rocks. That's pretty much all I can add. I am thinking about buying a Qutest though.


----------



## Christer (Oct 30, 2018)

x RELIC x said:


> Rob is a fan of transparency and his own work therefore he recommends the Hugo2 over the Qutest+amp for driving headphones. That doesn’t mean the Qutest will be terrible with headphones through a seperate amp depending on an individual’s tastes or preference for an external headphone amp, as @Nicholasheadfi2 concluded in his post.




Hmm, imho Qutest is actually not at all "terrible", but on the contrary, very good with headphones.

Moreover with difficult to drive planars  a high quality powerful headphone amp in combination with Qutest will to my ears at least, deliver a clearly better both fuller and more realistic sounding end result than the same headphones will directly via HUGO 2 or even with the same amp connected to H2.
I listen a lot to non compressed large scale classical symphonic and Opera music and HUGO 2 is both thinner and at heavy climaxes audibly more congested  than Qutest via both my HD800 and HEKV2.

And with a headphone like Susvara  HUGO 2 is simply not an option at all  IMO.
I would not even use Susvara with DAVE on its own.

If I remember correctly Rob seems to prefer IEMs and easy to drive over ear headphones like Audioquest Nighhawks and similar.
But to me,good as they are for their price level and size/ convenience they are not as resolving as bigger  and pricier dynamic or planar headphones.
When I did my first comparisons between H2 and Qutest I also listened to the Audioquests and Audezes and other mid-priced headphones  and they often sounded very nice, but would not really compare with for example HEKV2 or  Utopias when things got very busy and loud as so often wth symphonic music.

Budget headphones break up and show their limitations when challenged by really complex richly scored acoustic symphonic music.
Much as I hate to have to admit it, there is a quite clear correlation between price and SQ as far as headphones are concerned.
And Qutest is, although not the best DAC I have heard, at least good enough to benefit from really high quality headphones.
My Qutest is certainly good enough to let me quite easily hear how  much more resolved my HEKV2 sounds over my HD800 when things get really busy with really well recorded hi res material!
But I have to admit that I sometimes prefer my HD800 with lower res Youtube and  other streamed
music.
Why ?
Because it can sound slightly warmer and more forgiving with less than stellar recordings and formats .
Cheers Christer


----------



## GreenBow

Some people with the Hugo 2 used an adapter from RCA to a headphone socket. You could maybe use one on the Qutest, and then use digital volume control on your source. Not sure if that will mean music is strictly 100% bit-perfect though.


----------



## AlexB73

Yes software volume control is not bit perfect and mostly bad implemented. 
But 100% analog headphones amplifiers have analog volume control.
Why do you need to use software volume control if you use Qutest and external headphone amplifier?


----------



## maxh22

Christer said:


> Hmm, imho Qutest is actually not at all "terrible", but on the contrary, very good with headphones.
> 
> Moreover with difficult to drive planars  a high quality powerful headphone amp in combination with Qutest will to my ears at least, deliver a clearly better both fuller and more realistic sounding end result than the same headphones will directly via HUGO 2 or even with the same amp connected to H2.
> I listen a lot to non compressed large scale classical symphonic and Opera music and HUGO 2 is both thinner and at heavy climaxes audibly more congested  than Qutest via both my HD800 and HEKV2.
> ...



Why not just get a TT2 and sell off the Qutest and Benchmark to recover some funds? It looks like it might be the only all in one solution that might actually work for you and it will drive all your headphones.


----------



## Tiano L

dc71 said:


> Into my Qutest I have used Bluesound Node 2 (spdif coax and toslink), SOTM sms200, and Lumin D1 (spdif bnc). For me, the Qutest sounds best with its galvanically isolated inputs. The SOTM via USB sounded supremely natural, followed by the Node2 with Lifatec glass toslink. Lumin D1 sounds marginally more 'tense' and digital (less engaging) by comparison. The sound quality delta between SOTM and Node2 was greater than between Node2 and D1 which is marginal.
> 
> Unfortunately I can't live with the SOTM as I want to be able to switch between local files, Tidal and Spotify without messing in a browser. It was also much slower in operation and locked up more than the Bluesound/Lumin units both of which have great control apps and seamless library/streaming service access.
> 
> ...




Just curious: how does the Lumin D1 (using its own dac) compare to the Node2 + Qutest?


----------



## Christer

maxh22 said:


> Why not just get a TT2 and sell off the Qutest and Benchmark to recover some funds? It looks like it might be the only all in one solution that might actually work for you and it will drive all your headphones.



Thanks for the advice. 
That will of course be something I will take  a closer look at this winter in Asia, together with careful auditions of how well Qutest works and sounds with an M-scaler.
But apart from my Benchmark amp I also have a couple of other quite capable class A headphone amps that pair quite well with Qutest.
And if anything an M-scaler has higher priority for me than only doubling the number of taps from Qutest to TT2 would mean.
From my earlier trials I have strong reasons to suspect that M-scaling would  add way  more for me than a TT2 on its own would.
Cheers Christer


----------



## gad1

Does Chord recommend leaving the Qutest
always on?  Any tradeoffs if left on or daily
turned off?


----------



## dc71

Tiano L said:


> Just curious: how does the Lumin D1 (using its own dac) compare to the Node2 + Qutest?



That is close, very close, I would say purely down to personal preference. Overall, the sound balance is very similar, but the reason I stuck with Qutest is due to the strong control of bass, as it has less overhang, which in turn gave less interaction with a heavy 50hz room mode I have in my listening space. One reviewer attributed this aspect to Qutest's fine ability to start/stop notes, and I would agree with this. In my room it resulted in more texture/differentiation to bass notes and less boom.

Not that I would say the Lumin bass is woolly or lacking definition, in fact its overall sound was one of the best I have had in my system. If my room had no inherent bass issues, I would think seriously about a simple system such as D1/D2 direct (or with good preamp) to active speakers such as Yamaha HS8, Mackie HR824mk2 or even Genelec G5. Active speakers have some inherent benefits over passives and the studio monitors allow tailoring of the sound to your listening space, as well as costing far less than equivalent 'hi-fi' active speakers. I am continually amazed by how enjoyable my second system is (Node2 into JBL LSR305).

D1/D2 are great units if used with their internal DAC, but if you already have a DAC which you really like the sound of, then a dedicated transport will likely be a better value option to feed it. My Lumin U1 mini and Qutest will likely stay in my system for a long time to come.


----------



## gad1

Color me impressed.  My previous dac was the old Yiggy w/o
the improved usb and analogue upgrades.  I tired of the Yiggy
sound after a couple of yrs.  In my system it just never
delivered on the high praise that evidently other's experienced.
My sound goal is emotional involvement w/o sound quality
distractions.  My Salk HT3 spkrs. were bought new 10 yrs.
ago.  My Ava Van Alstine pre and amp bought new 5 yrs.
ago.  This spkr./power combo is essentially the same that
Jim Salk used to demo these spkrs. at audio shows.  I bought
a show demo.  Point being my spkrs./amp have decent
synergy.  For 10 yrs. I have not been thrilled.  The sound
has been decent but based on dollar (usd) expense not
satisfactory.  My previous dacs were the Wyred4Sound
dac 2 dsdse and Schiit Yggy.  Yggy was way better but
still no magic.  A respected poster on audioadvisor.com
had recommended the synergy of the original Hugo with
equipment similar to mine which put Chord on my radar.
I almost pulled the trigger for the 2Qute but decided to
wait for the next generation.  I'm going on 3 wks. into
a 30 day $ back trial period with Qutest and despite my
skepticism for most all audio claims, it is afterall a
business, I'm suitably impressed.  The first wk. I was
jumping through all the options, different filters, voltages,
uptone usb regen in the chain or not, pretty neurotic and
not at all sold.  The sound scape, stereo instrument
positioning, was dramatically better from day one.  The
highs and mids were great but the bass was lacking.
Whether I burned in or the dac burned in or both
presently the bass is the best I've ever heard; yeah,
way better than Yggy.  The overall realism verges on
scary.  So despite my initial reluctance to pay the
inflated USA price and less than ideal warranty
situation, Seattle to England, ugh, this little black
brick aint goin nowhere.

gad-


----------



## GreenBow

I think the first time experience with chord DACs is like, where is the bass. It either does burn-in. Or it's just a case of finding it in the soundstage. When there is less soundstage, the bass is easy to see. When there is more soundstage you are outfaced by detail. Then you start looking for the bass, hear it, and then hear the music as a whole.


----------



## musickid (Oct 31, 2018)

Can someone explain why or why not the qutest should or should not be used to drive headphones directly. The only issue seems to be volume control??? I would appreciate any real detail on this. I'm referring to direct drive not with a headphone amp.

If connecting mscaler to qutest with direct headphones attached does software volume control become impossible because the digital audio going into the mscaler cannot be volume controlled like an analogue signal thus making direct headphone connection to qutest impossible with an mscaler and headphones driven directly??? Or can the volume be controlled after the line level leaves qutest by an attenuator? Actually roon can control the volume with my hugo2/mscaler.

I want to understand this point not do it.


----------



## Ilias9001

musickid said:


> Can someone explain why or why not the qutest should or should not be used to drive headphones directly. The only issue seems to be volume control??? I would appreciate any real detail on this. I'm referring to direct drive not with a headphone amp.
> 
> If connecting mscaler to qutest with direct headphones attached does software volume control become impossible because the digital audio going into the mscaler cannot be volume controlled like an analogue signal thus making direct headphone connection to qutest impossible with an mscaler and headphones driven directly??? Or can the volume be controlled after the line level leaves qutest by an attenuator? Actually roon can control the volume with my hugo2/mscaler.
> 
> I want to understand this point not do it.


As simple as it gets, Qutest is a standalone dac with a pair of rca outputs. It produces a low voltage signal whose only purpose is to be amplified to be able to power headphones or speakers. The lack of volume control is not the issue, whereas the absence of volume is. Do not confuse it with your hugo2, as it has an amplification stage and the qutest does not.


----------



## dac64

gad1 said:


> The first wk. I was jumping through all the options, different filters, voltages, uptone usb regen in the chain or not...



what is your final setting on the filters, voltages, uptone usb regen in the chain or not? TIA!


----------



## miketlse

musickid said:


> Can someone explain why or why not the qutest should or should not be used to drive headphones directly. The only issue seems to be volume control??? I would appreciate any real detail on this. I'm referring to direct drive not with a headphone amp.
> 
> If connecting mscaler to qutest with direct headphones attached does software volume control become impossible because the digital audio going into the mscaler cannot be volume controlled like an analogue signal thus making direct headphone connection to qutest impossible with an mscaler and headphones driven directly??? Or can the volume be controlled after the line level leaves qutest by an attenuator? Actually roon can control the volume with my hugo2/mscaler.
> 
> I want to understand this point not do it.


Search all threads using the term 'attenuator' and posted by 'RW' and this discovers a few posts.
Maybe this post about the 2Qute is appropriate. https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/page-50#post-14065005 
I think in some other posts, Rob mentions that attenuating the line outs using resisters will increase the damping factor, and affect the reproduction of bass notes. However this 'compromise' may be acceptable for some owners, if it means that they can continue to use their favourite headphones.


----------



## gad1 (Nov 1, 2018)

dac64 said:


> what is your final setting on the filters, voltages, uptone usb regen in the chain or not? TIA!



White sphere, incisive  neutral.  I mostly listen to well mastered/recorded jazz.  Infrequently when
there is a hint of digital edginess I go to warm HF roll-off, redest sphere.  Variable line level output
I have set at 2V rms.  My system displays an unpleasant edge with 3V.  The uptone usb regen
introduced a tone that pre dac burnin I liked.  Three wks. in the regen is permanently removed.
It dampens the dynamics.  Less liveliness.  The naked Qutest, no pumped lpsu, no ultra this or
that, delivers to the point where, "if it ain't broke don't fix it", comes to mind.  This of course is
entirely system dependent.

gad-


----------



## Nik74

Optical input, Incisive neutral filter, 2V. On the source side I m now settled until I save  ££ for M-Scaler. Will play with tube rolling again soon as I have a few combos to try out  In the meantine in terms of musical enjoyment I m set.


----------



## ctrlm

I have about 60 hours actual playing time on mine so far. I've settled on the slightly more relaxed 2V output after running on 3V for a long period out of the box. Incisive neutral but still coming to grips with the other filters. I'm powering it with the Uptone Ultracap LPS 1.2 that I had spare after a quick comparison with the the stock SMPS early on but I intend to swap them around again soon to see if there really is any difference. The only issue I have with the stock power supply is that I got rid of all the SMPSs in my system long ago and as a whole it made a big difference to SQ, so I'm loathe to start putting one back.


----------



## dac64

Thanks all for configuration of your Qutest!

And OMG! the colour of my line level output is "White"! I check the Qutest online manual, there wasn't any "White", only red, green and blue available.

Need to check my manual home tonight.


----------



## veeceeem

dac64 said:


> Thanks all for configuration of your Qutest!
> 
> And OMG! the colour of my line level output is "White"! I check the Qutest online manual, there wasn't any "White", only red, green and blue available.
> 
> Need to check my manual home tonight.


Line level output light color is only displayed on startup of Qutest iirc


----------



## dac64

veeceeem said:


> Line level output light color is only displayed on startup of Qutest iirc



Yeah boy! That was some time back!

I will try powerbank over this weekend.

I used stock power supply, and white-white from day one.


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2 (Nov 2, 2018)

I had the chance yesterday to test the qutest with my woo audio wa6se and my audeze lcd3s the qutest was paired with the mcru power supply russ andrews power block and russ andrews power cord 300s all round (sorry about cable talk for all the skeptics)
after reading the posts from rob watts about the qutest compatibility with headphones i was a bit worried about the outcome
i previously was using the schiit bifrost with my set up which i thought sounded amazing until i plugged in the qutest .
after a couple of hours warm up time on the qutest i had a long two hour listening session and all i can say is that the difference is night and day
this little beauty is above all in terms of rythem,timing soundstage , bass response and transparency
i was hooked from the moment i put my lcd3s on my head , i had no idea that my headphones was capable of such a great
response.
so my conclusion is that this little gem is hard to beat at this price point and i have heard many dacs in my time. just one more thing i noticed it does not have a power off button is there any other way to power down other than switching off from the mains? should it not power down once the source is turned off?
 good work rob very highly appreciated for all your hard work and quality products .


----------



## Sound Eq

can i ask please, I am looking to improve streaming into my system

would be adding a streamer to my system ---- chord qutest--- ifi ican pro be better solution than using tidal just by connecting my dac to my laptop

do u have any advise which streamer to use that has mqa support ( I know qutest does not support MQA ) but since I am considering buying a streamer why not choose one that has mqa support. Which is the best price performance streamer that u can would recommend

thanks


----------



## GreenBow (Nov 2, 2018)

I bought a digital copy of November HiFi News, for the Qutest review.

I read the post a few pages back about HiFi News saying they swapped out the power supply. The review was actually quite difficult to follow. (I know some may disagree but here is what I thought.)

Quote:
"Before I go on to describe my experiences of the Qutest's sound quality, we have first to address the issue of its power supply. PM's lab testing showed the standard 'wall wart' PSU to suffuse the audio output with interference that disappeared when he substituted a smartphone charger. I followed suit with an ifi Micro iPower .. etc."

It appears they are saying that the Chord supplied adaptor, created measurable noise in the Qutest audio output. That was solved by using a smartphone charger. ... Seriously! A smartphone charger has less noise that the charger Chord supplies and recommends. ... I actually find that hard to believe. However please don't mistake me for a Chord employee or over-zealous supporter. If I thought something was wrong with a Chord product I would say. In fact I sometimes think I found something wrong, write about it, then have to correct myself. (I did it within the last few days in the Mojo thread, about the Mojo case.)

HiFi News do go on to suggest, was the supplied charger one that didn't make it through Chord QA procedures. (That's not too good a thing to say, is it.)


In fact have an iFi Nano iUSB 3.0 power supply on my Chord Hugo 2. (I bought it thinking to use it with Mojo, as a RFI free power supply, as Mojo has no Chord charger.) I can't hear any difference between it and the supplied Chord charger, with Hugo 2. I know Chord would say, use theirs, because theirs removes RFI. However iFi power supplies use military grade RFI removal - apparently. ... That doesn't mean there is no difference in chargers used, as to sound quality. Just means I can't hear any.

I actually thought Rob had designed RF filtering removal into the Hugo 2, on both data and power in. We started using the Audioquest Jitterbug on out Mojo, on the Mojo USB data line in. To remove noise from noisy computers. It seemed to work. I figured Rob decided it would be cool to implement the same thing in his DACs. Though it may well have already been implemented in other DACs. However Rob does say, he can't detect any difference between optical and USB on the Hugo 2.


----------



## audiobill

Sound Eq said:


> can i ask please, I am looking to improve streaming into my system
> 
> would be adding a streamer to my system ---- chord qutest--- ifi ican pro be better solution than using tidal just by connecting my dac to my laptop
> 
> ...


Just to be clear even if you get a streamer which supports MQA it can only provide the first unfold (also called MQA Core) when used with a non-MQA DAC like the Qutest. The subsequent step known as MQA rendering is DAC specific so it cannot be provided by a streamer.


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> can i ask please, I am looking to improve streaming into my system
> 
> would be adding a streamer to my system ---- chord qutest--- ifi ican pro be better solution than using tidal just by connecting my dac to my laptop
> 
> ...



Are you streaming over WiFi or Ethernet? How is Qutest connected , USB, Optical?

There are ways to optimize your laptop and get top notch sound without spending big bucks.


----------



## GreenBow

GreenBow said:


> I bought a digital copy of November HiFi News, for the Qutest review.
> 
> I read the post a few pages back about HiFi News saying they swapped out the power supply. The review was actually quite difficult to follow. (I know some may disagree but here is what I thought.)
> 
> ...



I found a bit ore about the Qutest power supply from a Chord PR. In the May 2018 edition of HiFi Choice they reviewed the Qutest. ... This is what Dan George Chord Electronics PR said about the Qutest power supply. He was asked, "Would there be an optional uprated power supply?".

Reply, quote,
    "No, it's simply not necessary. Like its predecessor the 2Qute, our digital consultant Rob Watts spent a long time designing the internal power filtering and regulation so that the external power supply could not influence the sound.".


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 3, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> Are you streaming over WiFi or Ethernet? How is Qutest connected , USB, Optical?
> 
> There are ways to optimize your laptop and get top notch sound without spending big bucks.



My goal is to totally get rid of connecting the qutest to any laptop, and rely on one device that will be connected to chord qutest which is then connected to my ifi ican pro amp, and use tidal or deezer from their app, and as well have a usb hard drive connected to the streamer as well

so I am looking for a one device do all, the most important thing is get of rid of my laptop connection to dac, and at same time play music from hard drives and streaming services like tidal. But of course I like to have an app to control all this from a pc, android and ios


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> My goal is to totally get rid of connecting the qutest to any laptop, and rely on one device that will be connected to chord qutest which is then connected to my ifi ican pro amp, and use tidal or deezer from their app, and as well have a usb hard drive connected to the streamer as well
> 
> so I am looking for a one device do all the most important thing is get of rid of my laptop connection to dac, and at same time play music from hard drives and streaming services like tidal



So you're essentially looking for a screenless audio server, there are plenty of options in different price ranges that can serve your needs, what's your budget?

But if you're looking to squeeze out more from your laptop you can run Audirvana on Windows 10 and buy their IOS app to wirelessly change tracks. I usually have the screen off as well and the sound is fantastic especially now that I have a clean Ethernet signal and Optical signal.


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 3, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> So you're essentially looking for a screenless audio server, there are plenty of options in different price ranges that can serve your needs, what's your budget?
> 
> But if you're looking to squeeze out more from your laptop you can run Audirvana on Windows 10 and buy their IOS app to wirelessly change tracks. I usually have the screen off as well and the sound is fantastic especially now that I have a clean Ethernet signal and Optical signal.



Price is range is 1500 usd, i do not mind buying a used unit from forums, but of course i want the one that does support highest bit rate and can feed into my qutest
all i want is get rid of connecting my dac via usb to laptop via usb and find other solutions
but still i want to use my computer to control playback of music as a control room, and having android and ios apps is a plus as well


----------



## plsvn

Sound Eq said:


> Price is range is 1500 usd, i do not mind buying a used unit from forums, but of course i want the one that does support highest bit rate and can feed into my qutest
> all i want is get rid of connecting my dac to my laptop and find other solutions



Aries Mini, Aries LE, Aries femto, Lumin U1 Mini, Aries G1, Aries G2, Lumin U1 are those I would consider. All do exactly what you want: just pick the one that suits your budget
Running a Lumin U1 Mini -> Qutest -> RWA Signature 15 -> Klipsch R-15M as my secondary system and.. it sounds great (Qobuz Studio streaming and local files on a USB HD)


----------



## naynay (Nov 3, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> Price is range is 1500 usd, i do not mind buying a used unit from forums, but of course i want the one that does support highest bit rate and can feed into my qutest
> all i want is get rid of connecting my dac via usb to laptop via usb and find other solutions
> but still i want to use my computer to control playback of music as a control room, and having android and ios apps is a plus as well



Aries Femto yours best option as you can pick a used one up now for £1000 due to new releases G1/G2
Aries Femto USB output to Qutest Dac great sound just note you will not get max DSD or PCM for that i would recommend sms-200ultra which i use and also great sounding not much to choose between the two.


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> Price is range is 1500 usd, i do not mind buying a used unit from forums, but of course i want the one that does support highest bit rate and can feed into my qutest
> all i want is get rid of connecting my dac via usb to laptop via usb and find other solutions
> but still i want to use my computer to control playback of music as a control room, and having android and ios apps is a plus as well



If I didn't already have my MSI laptop and I was in the market for a headless server I would get the Zen Mini MK3 and use the Optical output.

It's right in your budget:

https://almaaudio.com/products/innuos-zen-mini-mk3-music-server


----------



## plsvn

maxh22 said:


> It's right in your budget:
> 
> https://almaaudio.com/products/innuos-zen-mini-mk3-music-server



I would, instead, stay away from anything that does more than just stream (local files and online service) and put all my money on that not on extra hardware/software


----------



## ATXKyle

Triode User said:


> It would be very useful if you could describe the change in the sound due to adding the power supply on account of one mans improvement being another mans worsening. Thanks.


It’s been awhile since I made the change, but when switching to the LPS 1.2 I recall even blacker background (which helps almost all dimensions), more precise bass and overall more lifelike sound.  When you make the change you need to wait a day or two for the DAC clock to settle in.


----------



## ATXKyle

Sound Eq said:


> Price is range is 1500 usd, i do not mind buying a used unit from forums, but of course i want the one that does support highest bit rate and can feed into my qutest
> all i want is get rid of connecting my dac via usb to laptop via usb and find other solutions
> but still i want to use my computer to control playback of music as a control room, and having android and ios apps is a plus as well


You could run Roon Server on your current computer and then buy or build a high quality Roon endpoint to feed your DAC.  Over at computer audiophile a lot of folks are talking about DIY Roon endpoints using a new version of Audiolinux OS that can run directly from RAM (look at the recent posts by Romaz).  Apparently it sounds amazing.  If you don’t want to DIY the endpoints by SoTM and Sonore are also very popular.  With any of these endpoints you need to budget for a good power supply for best SQ.


----------



## GreenBow

I have been thinking about buying a hard drive type music player. Something like the Novafidelity X14, to use a file source. I need something for when my PC is turned off, so I don't need PC on for file source.


----------



## always learning

Has anyone compared the Luxman DA-06 to the Chord Qutest?  I currently own the Luxman, which engages me.  I'm considering the Qutest for my second system. 

Your thoughts on the Chord Qutest compared to the Luxman DA-06 DAC please?


----------



## Nik74

one of those nights.... 6 hour of non stop music pleasure, almost an out of body experience at times- no I ve not even had a glass of wine this eve -, I cannot believe the effortless detail , flow and musicality and the synergy between the Qutest and the rest of my gear. I think my brain will explode when I add an M-Scaler...


----------



## always learning

Sounds like you've found the perfect DAC for yourself. Fabulous!  Have you compared this to the Luxman DA-06?


----------



## Nik74 (Nov 4, 2018)

I m quite new to all  of this so I dont have experience of many different DACs. I ve heard all of the Chord offerings various times and had the Hugo before getting the Qutest. In terms of digital components I ve also heard a full DCS stack and top Naim systems but unfortunately never the Luxman you are asking about. It looks rather more expensive than the Qutest  for sure at £3.999.


----------



## dac64

Nik74 said:


> for sure at £3.999.



at this price, i buy qutest + hms.


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

dac64 said:


> at this price, i buy qutest + hms.


Does anyone know anything about the Aries g1 volume control ? I’m looking to buy the g1 to go with my qutest dac and my woo audio
Wa6se amp due to the fact that I’m sick of having to get up every time to either turn the volume up or down or shutting down the Mac after use
I usually fall asleep with my headphones on and the hassle of getting out of bed is annoying lol so I’m asking if I can control the volume on the g1 even when hooked up to the wa6se amp.Switching the power of is a tick for me but what about the volume will that work and will the sound quality be better
Than my existing MacBook Pro.


----------



## Sound Eq

GreenBow said:


> I have been thinking about buying a hard drive type music player. Something like the Novafidelity X14, to use a file source. I need something for when my PC is turned off, so I don't need PC on for file source.


how would that be different than my question for a streamer


----------



## always learning

Nik74 said:


> I m quite new in all this so I dont have experience of many different DACs. I ve heard all of the Chord offerings various times and had the Hugo before getting the Qutest. In terms of digital components I ve also heard a full DCS stack and top Naim systems but unfortunately never the Luxman you are asking about


Well, I'm glad that you found what you're looking for.


dac64 said:


> at this price, i buy qutest + hms.



Have you listened to the Chord Qutest and the Luxman DA-06?  

I'm hoping to connect with someone who has compared their sounds.  I do not have access to both to compare.


----------



## miketlse

always learning said:


> Well, I'm glad that you found what you're looking for.
> 
> 
> Have you listened to the Chord Qutest and the Luxman DA-06?
> ...


Are you able to demo a Qutest?
The Luxman DA-06 uses a Burr Brown chip, so will suffer from the same ground plane issues as Sabre chips.
Read some of @Rob Watts posts about the issues with chip based dacs, and then you will be better placed to make an informed decision, if you get a chance to demo a Luxman.


----------



## always learning

Thanks.  I'm still hoping I can read about some folks subjective differences when they listened to these two DAC's.


----------



## miketlse

always learning said:


> Thanks.  I'm still hoping I can read about some folks subjective differences when they listened to these two DAC's.


Yes, but searching this thread using the term 'luxman' only lists posts about luxman amps, so you may be unlucky.
Have you searched any other threads?


----------



## always learning

miketlse said:


> Yes, but searching this thread using the term 'luxman' only lists posts about luxman amps, so you may be unlucky.
> Have you searched any other threads?


Yes. I'm unsuccessful searching so far for Luxman DA-06 vs Chord Qutest. Time to be patient...


----------



## soares

uRendu or sms 200 ultra. With uRendu you can't directly connect a hard drive. You also need a good PSU. Lokk for sBooster MKII or LPS-2.


----------



## dac64

always learning said:


> Have you listened to the Chord Qutest and the Luxman DA-06?



I've the Qutest and I never heard the Luxman DA-06 but I've a Luxman pre.


----------



## Rob Watts

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> I had the chance yesterday to test the qutest with my woo audio wa6se and my audeze lcd3s the qutest was paired with the mcru power supply russ andrews power block and russ andrews power cord 300s all round (sorry about cable talk for all the skeptics)
> after reading the posts from rob watts about the qutest compatibility with headphones i was a bit worried about the outcome
> i previously was using the schiit bifrost with my set up which i thought sounded amazing until i plugged in the qutest .
> after a couple of hours warm up time on the qutest i had a long two hour listening session and all i can say is that the difference is night and day
> ...



Thank-you. Power is only 2W, so no need to worry.


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

Rob Watts said:


> Thank-you. Power is only 2W, so no need to worry.


Thanks Rob top man


----------



## musickid (Nov 5, 2018)

A new *Chord chat and lounge thread* i have started over on the members lounge section. It's an area to just relax a little if anyone is interested.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-lounge-and-chat-area.892658/


----------



## dac64 (Nov 5, 2018)

dac64 said:


> Yeah boy! That was some time back!
> 
> I will try powerbank over this weekend.
> 
> I used stock power supply, and white-white from day one.



The Qutest have slightly better tempo, micro dynamics and more transparent using POWERADD Pilot Pro2 23000mAh Power Bank on my system.

However, I prefer the stock power supply because I am the believer of it's good to  always leave the electronics ON.

Btw, for a change,  I listen to bandwidth-limited media!


----------



## Sound Eq

Sound Eq said:


> can i ask please, I am looking to improve streaming into my system
> 
> would be adding a streamer to my system ---- chord qutest--- ifi ican pro be better solution than using tidal just by connecting my dac to my laptop
> 
> ...




When I looked at the prices for streamers mentioned to my above question, I thought if anyone has feedback about the medium price klipsch gate and if that could work

https://www.klipsch.com/products/gate


----------



## Nik74

Sound Eq said:


> When I looked at the prices for streamers mentioned to my above question, I thought if anyone has feedback about the medium price klipsch gate and if that could work
> 
> https://www.klipsch.com/products/gate


 
It depends on your priorities of course but this doesn’t seem to have a digital output which means you can’t use an external DAC . I d find this severely limiting but perhaps adequate in a low-fi setting .


----------



## Paul Bjernklo

Sound Eq said:


> When I looked at the prices for streamers mentioned to my above question, I thought if anyone has feedback about the medium price klipsch gate and if that could work
> 
> https://www.klipsch.com/products/gate



The new Chromecast Audio with optical out gets great reviews for possibly this use case, but only with optical does it get great comments so limited to 24/196 (no DSD). Could be worth considering if it fits your needs.


----------



## Sound Eq

Paul Bjernklo said:


> The new Chromecast Audio with optical out gets great reviews for possibly this use case, but only with optical does it get great comments so limited to 24/196 (no DSD). Could be worth considering if it fits your needs.



i never cared bout dsd at all, so i might look into this, as spending alot on this is not a priority as this tech is changing so fast that few months down the road whatever i buy if very expensive will be outdated


----------



## Nik74

The Chromecast is fantastic for the money and if you d pair it with Roon, it sounds even better. I much prefer it to USB from my Mac soundwise. It goes up to 24bit/96khz resolution though only. No big deal so far for a £30 solution


----------



## musickid

Optical from my imac with roon perfect.


----------



## plsvn

Sound Eq said:


> this tech is changing so fast that few months down the road whatever i buy if very expensive will be outdated



actually it's the other way around: whatever you buy, if pretty cheap, will be outdated... in a few *weeks*


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 6, 2018)

plsvn said:


> actually it's the other way around: whatever you buy, if pretty cheap, will be outdated... in a few *weeks*



no caring bout dsd and stuff as i listen mostly to cd quality and tidal and for only few bucks i will not be upset if it gets outdated so fast


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 6, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> The Chromecast is fantastic for the money and if you d pair it with Roon, it sounds even better. I much prefer it to USB from my Mac soundwise. It goes up to 24bit/96khz resolution though only. No big deal so far for a £30 solution



can u put a link which one on amazon to buy

just another question why when i type in google --- chromecast audio the site tells me that its not supported in my country, does chromecast work only in certain countries

https://store.google.com/countrypicker

does it mean i have to use vpn, if yes then this is not a solution for me


----------



## Nik74

Sound Eq said:


> can u put a link which one on amazon to buy
> 
> just another question why when i type in google --- chromecast audio the site tells me that its not supported in my country, does chromecast work only in certain countries
> 
> ...



“ *Chromecast does*not have built-in *VPN* or MediaStreamer DNS functionality. In order to *use*ExpressVPN on your *Chromecast*, you need to connect your *Chromecast* to a *VPN*-enabled virtual router or router.20 Sep 2018“, according to google


----------



## Nik74

I wonder if this is the kind of discussion that would fit with more relevance in the thread that @musickid created in the members lounge area


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> can u put a link which one on amazon to buy
> 
> just another question why when i type in google --- chromecast audio the site tells me that its not supported in my country, does chromecast work only in certain countries
> 
> ...



Chromecast isn't region specific there is nothing stopping it from working in Mars for example as long as there is Wifi and a device to set things up.
Amazon does not sell Google products so you would need to buy elsewhere, not sure what country you are in but eBay has tons for sale.


----------



## Mrandrade

[QUOTE = "maxh22, post: 14582996, member: 450242"] O Chromecast não é específico de uma região, não há nada que o impeça de trabalhar em Marte, por exemplo, desde que haja Wifi e um dispositivo para configurar as coisas.
A Amazon não vende produtos do Google, então você precisaria comprar em outro lugar, não tendo certeza de qual país você está, mas o eBay tem toneladas à


----------



## Mrandrade

You can by  the Chrome cast on Play store...


----------



## iaamap

Hope someone can help here:
Just bought a Qutest Chord to replace my beloved 2Qute DAC
downloaded drivers, check
windows sees device check
run setup to 2volt out check
use foobar for playing and it sees Chord device under DS: Chord etc etc
NO SOUND
no light in round window, foobar shows song playing and no signal getting to unit
this pc was windows 7
so
tried the whole thing again on a different windows10 machine
same issue
tried toslink/optical input instead of usb and windows would NOT even SEE the damm thing
have email out to chord
very disappointed and frustrated
any help appreciated


----------



## x RELIC x (Nov 8, 2018)

iaamap said:


> Hope someone can help here:
> Just bought a Qutest Chord to replace my beloved 2Qute DAC
> downloaded drivers, check
> windows sees device check
> ...



Hopefully it’s something simple. The input light is white for USB, right?


----------



## Pimsilveira

Can anyone suggest cables to connect a media streamer (digital-coaxial-rca) to one of the bnc inputs on the qutest?
Thanks


----------



## naynay

Pimsilveira said:


> Can anyone suggest cables to connect a media streamer (digital-coaxial-rca) to one of the bnc inputs on the qutest?
> Thanks


If you don't want to spend to much Chord Clearway Digital Coaxial  RCA TO BNC


----------



## dc71

Pimsilveira said:


> Can anyone suggest cables to connect a media streamer (digital-coaxial-rca) to one of the bnc inputs on the qutest?
> Thanks



I had good results with DH Lab D750 RCA to BNC on my Qutest. Very good construction and value for all their cables.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Pimsilveira said:


> Can anyone suggest cables to connect a media streamer (digital-coaxial-rca) to one of the bnc inputs on the qutest?
> Thanks


You can't go wrong with Blue Jeans Cables.Excellent VFM!


----------



## iaamap

OK, TY for pointing out the obvious
I am in idiot
I thought it would pick source on it's own
I did not have it set to usb input
I am quite surprised what an upgrade it is to the 2Qute
sounds amazing
thanks again


----------



## GreenBow (Nov 8, 2018)

iaamap said:


> OK, TY for pointing out the obvious
> I am in idiot
> I thought it would pick source on it's own
> I did not have it set to usb input
> ...



Can I ask. I think you're using windows 7. Does the Windows 10 driver run and work with Win7? or are you running the 2Qute drive which would have been Win 7?

I am generally curious to know because I am hanging on to Win 7. Yet all new Chord DACs have Win 10 drivers on the website.


----------



## iaamap

The Windows drivers for 10 are backward compatible for Win 7.   The work for older and all the newer dacs on Win 7


----------



## odessamarin

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> i just purchased the qutest to use with my woo audio wa6se and audeze lcd3 and have been reading that this dac is not really for headphone use
> what the hell man i wish i read these pages earlier i had no clue .
> is it really that bad with headphones?.



No.. you did exscellent choice. I know people who actually sale their Hugo2 because they don't liked how it sounds with headphones.
But as they like a lot DAC of Hugo2 , they do this to get rid of amplification stage of Hugo 2, to able to use their own amps. Sound like a smart choice to me.
And comming back to what Mr. Rod said.. )  Why you think he might say it? Any clue? Any? 
Enjoy your qutest! you did well!


----------



## Arniesb

odessamarin said:


> No.. you did exscellent choice. I know people who actually sale their Hugo2 because they don't liked how it sounds with headphones.
> But as they like a lot DAC of Hugo2 , they do this to get rid of amplification stage of Hugo 2, to able to use their own amps. Sound like a smart choice to me.
> And comming back to what Mr. Rod said.. )  Why you think he might say it? Any clue? Any?
> Enjoy your qutest! you did well!


I suspect that there is certain weakness in certain systems and therefore colored amps or not as transparent design amps will yeld more forgiving sound. I mean if amp sound identical as good dac why is there a problem? Does ultra transparent design amps like Chord's, Headamp sound bad because they reveal weakness better than standart amps?


----------



## GreenBow

I have Hugo 2 and the headphone ports are excellent. I might buy a Qutest also and I am thinking about it, but I would sell my Hugo 2.


----------



## Lodwales81

Evening all, any recommendations on a solid state amp under £1000 I have a tube amp at the moment but think a little detail is lost and warmth is added with tubes.


----------



## AlexB73

In general, tube amplifiers are more transparent.
Tube as amplification element has much less distortion. Transistor amplifiers need do more complex circuits with deep feedback to fix these distortions.
Complex circuits make sound less transparent and deep feedback made it more compressed and dead.
Also, transistors have thermal distortion that are not fixable even with deep feedback.
Some audiophile recognize harsh (because high harmonic desertions) transistor sound like "detailed" .
https://spectrum.ieee.org/consumer-electronics/audiovideo/the-cool-sound-of-tubes


----------



## Ilias9001

Lodwales81 said:


> Evening all, any recommendations on a solid state amp under £1000 I have a tube amp at the moment but think a little detail is lost and warmth is added with tubes.



I will not stand on technicalities, so two amazing choices imo are the rupert neve rnhp and the violectric hpa v200.
A friend is actually thinking of selling his mint v200.


----------



## odessamarin (Nov 9, 2018)

Lodwales81 said:


> Evening all, any recommendations on a solid state amp under £1000 I have a tube amp at the moment but think a little detail is lost and warmth is added with tubes.


I can recommend Bryston BHA-1, hopefully next week will report how it sounds with qutest...
But as solid state amp it has good reputation as honest and natural, capable to dirve anything ) this i can confirm.


----------



## GreenBow

Lodwales81 said:


> Evening all, any recommendations on a solid state amp under £1000 I have a tube amp at the moment but think a little detail is lost and warmth is added with tubes.



Just google best amplifier.


----------



## iaamap

Assistance Please, although not a Qutest (which is working fine)
I attached a Chord 2Qute ex to a win10 machine
machine recognizes device
downloaded and installed drivers (it says successful, ready to use)
no sound
look in device manager and device is there with "drivers not available"

any help GREATLY appreciated.


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 15, 2018)

I am planning to buy a decent pc to connect it to the chord qutest, I want to connect it optically to chord qutest. Shall the pc have optical out or optical in, sorry for the noob question. I guess optical out ???

Also the pc will be 5 meters away from the chord qutest, is it ok to buy a 5 meter optical cable


----------



## Nik74

Get a chrome cast which has optical out , probably cheaper than 5m of optical cable


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Nov 15, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> I am planning to buy a decent pc to connect it to the chord qutest, I want to connect it optically to chord qutest. Shall the pc have optical out or optical in, sorry for the noob question. I guess optical out ???
> 
> Also the pc will be 5 meters away from the chord qutest, is it ok to buy a 5 meter optical cable



Optical out. Kabeldirekt makes great cheap cables and even Rob Watts the designer has said so but may have referred to other cables in their range that he has tried. If laptop with optical out is hard to find / much more expensive I would agree with a previous poster and buy the latest new version of Chome cast and a shorter optical cable. I have not tried it but have seen many positive comments so may be worth trying. And yes 5 m optical should be ok if you go that route.


----------



## miketlse

Sound Eq said:


> I am planning to buy a decent pc to connect it to the chord qutest, I want to connect it optically to chord qutest. Shall the pc have optical out or optical in, sorry for the noob question. I guess optical out ???
> 
> Also the pc will be 5 meters away from the chord qutest, is it ok to buy a 5 meter optical cable


There are many posts on the chord threads, about how good the kabeldirekt are, in spite of their low cost. https://www.amazon.fr/KabelDirekt-Câble-Optique-TOSLINK-optique/dp/B004YEJO4Q
I use one of their 10m cables, with no issues.
You could use such cables to test an optical system, and only later choose whether to spend megabucks on a different brand cable.


----------



## dac64 (Nov 15, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> Get a chrome cast which has optical out , probably cheaper than 5m of optical cable



Do you have a picture of chrome cast with optical out? I only seen HDMI and Micro-USB connections. TIA

Or do you mean chrome cast Audio?


----------



## veeceeem

dac64 said:


> Do you have a picture of chrome cast with optical out? I only seen HDMI and Micro-USB connections. TIA
> 
> Or do you mean chrome cast Audio?


It's Chromecast Audio, I'm also using one for optical output to my Qutest + Hifi-Cast on Android phone. Superb for $35


----------



## dac64

veeceeem said:


> It's Chromecast Audio, I'm also using one for optical output to my Qutest + Hifi-Cast on Android phone. Superb for $35



Thanks for the reply!

Can the Chromecast Audio accept optical cable straight without a 3.5mm to optical converter? I can only see a 3.5mm connection.


----------



## Nik74

dac64 said:


> Thanks for the reply!
> 
> Can the Chromecast Audio accept optical cable straight without a 3.5mm to optical converter? I can only see a 3.5mm connection.



No it cannot 
You either need an adapter - Audioquest do one- or a mini toslink to full toslink cable.


----------



## veeceeem

dac64 said:


> Thanks for the reply!
> 
> Can the Chromecast Audio accept optical cable straight without a 3.5mm to optical converter? I can only see a 3.5mm connection.


The 3.5mm port is for both analog and optical output ( same port size, shape)
In other word, It's mini-optical port plugged into Chromecast Audio, which shape and size is identical to a 3.5mm analog port
Just google "mini toslink" to check


----------



## dac64

Thanks all! Got a better picture now!


----------



## odessamarin (Nov 19, 2018)

Hi all.. today I had really really carefull listenning session to my Qutest. I wish to hear directly to this DAC without any amps.
So I connect Grado HP1000 directly to line out. It's need attenuation (see picture), but works very well this way.
Here is my results and contribution to the community )
Today about DSD support (again)). I found that only D2P with White filter plays DSD correctly on my Qutest!
Other filters and DoP will make scene flat. You can easily confirm it by yourself...
If you want to hear what i mean, you need to listen 2nd track  Mourning Grace form Patricia Barber - Cafe Blue in DSD.
This is one of the best album to listen and hear deep 3D sound image and scene.
What you will find is that only D2P White filter will blow your mind from this song.. and you will surprise how other combibations make it flat!
I hear it very well from headphones. Good to test your gears and hearing 
Let me know what you heard.
I found it interesting to share...

UPD: made AB listening with stock power supply and battery power bank... no difference to me!
but it's nixe to have options for autonomy battery use. Qutest consume no more then 0,6A. So almoste any power bank can feed it nicely.

the only regret about Qutest is no power button ( feels strange always remove cable or unplug adapter. Strange decision for 2018 hardware design. Is include power button would add that much to the final price?!?


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 18, 2018)

odessamarin said:


> Hi all.. today I had really really carefull listenning session to my Qutest. I wish to hear directly to this DAC without any amps.
> So I connect Grado HP1000 directly to line out. It's need attenuation (see picture), but works very well this way.
> Here is my results and contribution to the community )
> Today about DSD support (again)). I found that only D2P with White filter plays DSD correctly on my Qutest!
> ...


Hi what do you mean needs attenuation and can this be done using other headphones


----------



## odessamarin (Nov 18, 2018)

Why nerds? I used normal analog Rotary Potentiometer.. like Alps and others..
Grado choice is they are low impedance.. 32ohm. I found line out stage of Qutest very capable.
UPD. Get the same results with my Mapletree MAD Ear+ HD headphone amp paired to Qutest.


----------



## ZappaMan

Darko review


----------



## plsvn (Nov 20, 2018)

love the Qutest but... Darko’s shamelessly gone all the way down to plain advertising spots


----------



## jwbrent

plsvn said:


> love the Qutest but... Darko’s shamelessly gone all the way down to plain advertising spots



I listened to one of his podcasts recently, and the subject of liking the gear he reviews came up between him and his co-host. Both agreed that this is to be expected because the components Darko reviews are components he has a keen interest in beforehand whether it be due to the brand, feature set, design, or anticipated performance.

I do like his website and most of the podcasts he’s released, and on the subject of the Qutest, I wholeheartedly agree with his assessment.


----------



## ZappaMan

plsvn said:


> love the Qutest but... Darko’s shamelessly gone all the way down to plain advertising spots


Good to keep an open mind / so do u think chord throw him a bung but schitt don’t?
Just asking - have to be vigilant.


----------



## plsvn

it’s not that much about what he says: it’s the way he says it and the whole visual, graphics and all that screams “ tv spot”


----------



## ZappaMan

plsvn said:


> it’s not that much about what he says: it’s the way he says it and the whole visual, graphics and all that screams “ tv spot”


Yes, I saw his other videos, and I thought the same, but only in the context that he makes great video adverts for products - I’m sure the manufacturers must be very grateful.
On one hand, his production skills improve, and his viewers must enjoy the content too.
But in darko case, I don’t suspect foul play.


----------



## maxh22

Darko tells it the way he sees it, for better or for worse. I feel that he is very genuine in his beliefs and opinions and that is a very good thing. 

As others have noted his production skills have gotten a lot more sophisticated so that just means better content for us


----------



## maxh22

I found it interesting that he too here's a difference between H2 and Qutest and says Qutest is the best sounding of the bunch.


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 20, 2018)

ZappaMan said:


> Darko review




 I want the same setup that he has chord and the allo , can someone send links to the same cable or whatever cable similar to it, and does need an adapter going into chord, Finally on the allo what is this dome shiny metal thing. Simply I want links for everything related to allo, cables and plugs used to connect it to qutest

which operating system to choose when u buy the allo, i am using windows

https://www.allo.com/sparky/digione-signature-player.html


----------



## jbrownson

I'm trying to drive my Sure KSE 1500 with a Chord Qutest. The Qutest only has RCA outputs. The KSE 1500 only has a minijack input. I am using an RCA to minijack cable (actually I've tried 3 of varying quality). I'm getting a very audible buzz when not touching the case of the Qutest or KSE 1500. If I touch either case the buzzing stops. Adjusting the volume doesn't impact the buzz.

I removed elements and got it down to having a buzz even when it's simply the Qutest plugged into the wall power w/ its original power adapter, and the RCA to minijack connector going to the KSE 1500. i.e. No USB connection to the Quest and no power connection to the KSE 1500.

I sometimes use the Qutest with some other equipment that takes RCA directly (BHSE) and I don't have this problem. I also don't get the buzz when I drive the KSE 1500s with a Chord Mojo which has a minijack out. I don't get a buzz when I use a Chord Dave's RCA outputs to drive the KSE 1500 with the same RCA to minijack cable. There seems to be something about the specific combination of the KSE 1500 and the Qutest that is causing trouble.

Any advice for how I can connect these devices up without the buzz?

Cross posting this in the KSE 1500 and Qutest threads.


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> I want the same setup that he has chord and the allo , can someone send links to the same cable or whatever cable similar to it, and does need an adapter going into chord, Finally on the allo what is this dome shiny metal thing. Simply I want links for everything related to allo, cables and plugs used to connect it to qutest
> 
> which operating system to choose when u buy the allo, i am using windows
> 
> https://www.allo.com/sparky/digione-signature-player.html



Have you watched his Allo video yet? 



It contains some useful information and answers most of your questions except for the "dome shiny metal thing" which to me looks like some sort of isolator


----------



## plsvn

Sound Eq said:


> what is this dome shiny metal thing



https://www.amazon.it/Oxid7-Fermapo...TF8&qid=1542747217&sr=8-1&keywords=fermaporte 

but you can find it in any hardware store for way less


----------



## GrussGott (Nov 20, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> I can unreservedly recommend the one that comes free in the box. *If it is good enough for Rob Watts, it must be good enough*



I think you said it perfectly, it's "good enough", not great.

Remember that Rob is the designer, Chord makes the product, and finally there are distributors - they all need to get their beaks wet (and there may be an importer in there somewhere too).  Overall, designers design for a population not for you the person.  Rob can't hear with your hears, nor does he design & test for your operating environment; only you can engineer the last mile, for you as a listener - and if you choose not to, that's your choice, but it certainly doesn't mean others shouldn't.

For example, BMW AG (Chord), who employs the automotive engineers and designers (Rob) of BMWs may select all-season tires which BMW AG then ships the car with - that's good population design, meaning anyone in any climate can confidently use the vehicle (the tires are "good enough").  Then, say, BMWNA imports the car to USA which a dealership (a business totally independent from BMWNA & BMWAG) then puts on the lot to sell.  The dealership (local Chord retail partner) may sell you upgraded performance summer tires (a battery or linear power supply, or an iFi purifier) which you may want because you only drive in warm weather thus for you as a driver it improves your dry performance.  (sure the all-season tires were "good enough", but to make the car perform great _for you_, you had to customize to you, your operating environment, and your primary use-case)

So "good enough" for Rob the designer doesn't mean "great" for you (or any of us) the listeners, because engineers design for a population not for individuals.


----------



## Jon L (Nov 20, 2018)

I have the Qutest on order.  Anybody know the micro-USB plug's pin assignments for DC power, as I strongly suspect I will need to make a DIY micro-USB cable to use with other power supplies I have on hand.

*Edit*
For convenience, I found these micro-USB to DC barrel adapter and ordered some.  FYI for those in the same shoes.

https://www.amazon.com/Conwork-2-Pa...coding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=WFA6JG7Q533TW9AZ6AK0

Actually, it seems like many people like the stock power supply to be fine and/or iFi iPower PS.  Anything that is demonstrably "better" sounding when directly compared to stock or iFi?


----------



## plsvn (Nov 21, 2018)

Jon L said:


> https://www.amazon.com/Conwork-2-Pa...coding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=WFA6JG7Q533TW9AZ6AK0



not sure that round one will work: Qutest's Micro USB socket is down inside a rectangular recess measuring, if memory deserves, just 9.5mm in height


----------



## dac64

Jon L said:


> I have the Qutest on order...



Why not cut the power cable from the stock power supply and re solder to the dc power?


----------



## dac64

plsvn said:


> not sure that round one will work: Qutest's Mini USB...



It'd not work. That is a usb-c.


----------



## odessamarin

GrussGott said:


> I think you said it perfectly, it's "good enough", not great.
> 
> Remember that Rob is the designer, Chord makes the product, and finally there are distributors - they all need to get their beaks wet (and there may be an importer in there somewhere too).  Overall, designers design for a population not for you the person.  Rob can't hear with your hears, nor does he design & test for your operating environment; only you can engineer the last mile, for you as a listener - and if you choose not to, that's your choice, but it certainly doesn't mean others shouldn't.
> 
> ...




Sorry, but i really do not understand all this buzz about Qutes and Power Supply. There is ZERO problem.. really. Please argue where i am wrong:
1. Listen Qutest with stock power supply.
2. Listen Qutest with any power bank. Qutest need no more then 0.6A form my measurment.. Almoste any power bank can serve up 1A.
3. I hear no difference.

So, what is wrong with this? I mean, OK, i can't here, but somebody can. So use power bank...  It will be in any case more "clear" power source than any AC/DC bricks.


----------



## Nik74

Tell you what guys , while you re at it, why don’t you remove the FPGA chip too , write your own code and see if that makes any difference ? LOL 
Excuse my humour but catch my drift


----------



## odessamarin

Nik74 said:


> Tell you what guys , while you re at it, why don’t you remove the FPGA chip too , write your own code and see if that makes any difference ? LOL
> Excuse my humour but catch my drift



well.. FPGA a bit more soldering.. otherwise.. yea )))
But regarding power supply... really don't get


----------



## GrussGott (Nov 21, 2018)

odessamarin said:


> Please argue where i am wrong:



"I drive my car with all-season tires and I never lose traction - please argue where I'm wrong"

You're not wrong; for how and where you drive you don't need better tires, you're good.  For how and where I drive, I do.  Being incomplete, doesn't mean wrong, just incomplete.



Nik74 said:


> Tell you what guys , while you re at it, why don’t you remove the FPGA chip too , write your own code and see if that makes any difference ? LOL
> Excuse my humour but *catch my drift*



Yes, your drift is that you believe the Qutest's sound quality is 100% immune from power supply quality and that the shipped PS works equally well everywhere in the World for everyone in World.

Believe me Nik, we identified the quality of your power supply drift many posts ago.


----------



## ctrlm

GrussGott said:


> Yes, your drift is that you believe the Qutest's sound quality is 100% immune from power supply quality and that the shipped PS works equally well everywhere in the World for everyone in World.
> 
> Believe me Nik, we identified the quality of your power supply drift many posts ago.



And in my experience it is not just about SQ from the Qutest (or whatever you are using a SMPS to power), it's about the crud and DC offset you are introducing to your whole setup including pre-amps and integrated amps. It took me nearly a year to get rid of all the SMPSs in and around my setup and the improvement in SQ is significant. My integrated amp also used to have an audible hum from 1 to 2 ft away, that has completely disappeared with the removal of any SMPS.

So will adding just one SMPS back in make an audible difference? Who knows? Maybe it would take 2? The point is that I don't care what any company representative, design engineer or anyone else says....why would I change a strategy that worked for ME in MY setup with proven positive results?

To those that are using the Chord supplied PS and those who have elected to use an alternative - happy listening


----------



## Jon L

dac64 said:


> It'd not work. That is a usb-c.



So Qutest is not USB-C input?  What are the alternative adapters?  iFi iPower ships with DC-to-USB adapter.  Will that adapter cable fit Qutest?

https://www.amazon.com/iPower-Suppl...&keywords=ifi+ipower&smid=A2763VQ7SN6URD&th=1


----------



## Triode User

ctrlm said:


> And in my experience it is not just about SQ from the Qutest (or whatever you are using a SMPS to power), it's about the crud and DC offset you are introducing to your whole setup including pre-amps and integrated amps. It took me nearly a year to get rid of all the SMPSs in and around my setup and the improvement in SQ is significant. My integrated amp also used to have an audible hum from 1 to 2 ft away, that has completely disappeared with the removal of any SMPS.
> 
> So will adding just one SMPS back in make an audible difference? Who knows? Maybe it would take 2? The point is that I don't care what any company representative, design engineer or anyone else says....why would I change a strategy that worked for ME in MY setup with proven positive results?
> 
> To those that are using the Chord supplied PS and those who have elected to use an alternative - happy listening



Do you include the SMPS of Dave, Blu Mk2, Etude and countless other Chord amps in your blacklist of SMPS to be removed from the world?


----------



## GrussGott (Nov 22, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Do you include the SMPS of Dave, Blu Mk2, Etude and countless other Chord amps in your blacklist of SMPS to be removed from the world?



There's no real way to say Tri, since we typically don't know the details.  Some SMPSs, depending on the application, implementation, and design can be much quieter for audio than LPS, others crazy noisy with the high frequency horrors that SMPS got their well-deserved bad reputation for in the first place.

The easiest way is to just try different stuff to see what sounds better - there's no one right answer for everyone, everywhere, no matter the environment, user, or application.

Although ... to your point, thinking there are absolute answers is pretty tempting to believe ...


----------



## Triode User

GrussGott said:


> There's no real way to say Tri, since we typically don't know the details.  Some SMPSs, depending on the application, implementation, and design can be much quieter for audio than LPS, others crazy noisy with the high frequency horrors that SMPS got their well-deserved bad reputation for in the first place.
> 
> The easiest way is to just try different stuff to see what sounds better - there's no one right answer for everyone, everywhere, no matter the environment, user, or application.
> 
> Although ... to your point, thinking there are absolute answers is pretty tempting to believe ...



Ok, so I took my Dave out of the system and it was amazing, total silence and with no noise in the system. Wow! 

But then, neither was there any music.


----------



## Rob Watts

Triode User said:


> Ok, so I took my Dave out of the system and it was amazing, total silence and with no noise in the system. Wow!
> 
> But then, neither was there any music.



That sounds like some of the fanciful dynamic range measurements that some companies put out... Except they turn off the measuring gear too!


----------



## Triode User

Rob Watts said:


> That sounds like some of the fanciful dynamic range measurements that some companies put out... Except they turn off the measuring gear too!


----------



## dac64

Jon L said:


> Will that adapter cable fit Qutest?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/iPower-Supply-International-Adapters-15V/dp/B01GNNXP0Y/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1542916924&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=ifi+ipower&smid=A2763VQ7SN6URD&th=1



The one comes with  qutest is usb micro B.

And the power supply  comes with  usb micro B adapter, third picture.


----------



## Qute Beats (Nov 23, 2018)

Hi, new member here and proud owner of Qutest, so wanted to say hi.  First learned of the Qutest through these forums, pre-ordered and got one of the first shipments to my local dealer.  Since then I'd been happily using a generic USB cable that I had lying around as the length was convenient and did not believe a fancy audio one would make any difference.  Well on advice of dealer recently (went in to listen to the M-Scaler) I've bought an Audioquest Pearl.  Very surprised at the improvement this has brought. Maybe the original one was simply junk or there is some truth to this cable stuff, don't know but very pleased with the outcome 

Edit:  currently listening to You Want it Darker by Leonard Cohen.  I'm not good at the descriptions of sound, but with the new cable the sound is richer (darker?) and has improved clarity.


----------



## GrussGott

Qute Beats said:


> Maybe the original one was simply junk or there is some truth to this cable stuff, don't know but very pleased with the outcome



Seems like in the audio game there are those open-minded enough to try new things, use what sounds better, and explain it or not second ... and then those who must find an acceptable explanation first, and try things second.  Rob will tell you he's never heard a USB cable that's made a difference, and so it may be ... doesn't mean you or me or others won't.  I have an AQ carbon and, yes, it makes a difference (although beyond the Carbon I heard no difference).  Since AQ lets you try the cables risk-free, no reason not to try them all.


----------



## Arniesb

Qute Beats said:


> Hi, new member here and proud owner of Qutest, so wanted to say hi.  First learned of the Qutest through these forums, pre-ordered and got one of the first shipments to my local dealer.  Since then I'd been happily using a generic USB cable that I had lying around as the length was convenient and did not believe a fancy audio one would make any difference.  Well on advice of dealer recently (went in to listen to the M-Scaler) I've bought an Audioquest Pearl.  Very surprised at the improvement this has brought. Maybe the original one was simply junk or there is some truth to this cable stuff, don't know but very pleased with the outcome
> 
> Edit:  currently listening to You Want it Darker by Leonard Cohen.  I'm not good at the descriptions of sound, but with the new cable the sound is richer (darker?) and has improved clarity.


I used to be a non believer like you... But then i accidentally listened 1 cable for a few days and going back to old cable i notice what i lost and gain. Now i can easily hear differences between them. 1 should mention that bad usb cable is one of the main sources of harshness. In my book no cable can tame digital sound and harshness like well designed usb cable.
Also keeping in mind that Audioquest is not well designed usb cables. You can get a ton of info on ComputerAudiophile about usb stuff in particular.


----------



## Qute Beats (Nov 24, 2018)

thanks Arniesb for web site rec for more info.  Yes my thoughts were because I was getting no drop outs, signal therefore being transmitted correctly, so nothing needed changed.  Listening to some more albums I hear benefits over and over.  Currently playing Colour of Spring by Talk Talk, have listened to this CD many many times, yet now hearing small details I'd not picked up before (got this album in '86, originally on cassette).  I paid £25 for a 3m cable (customer return) so was not a big risk.  While I would think shorter is better (and no cable best), just not easy to have laptop close enough, all my music is Flac from external HDD.  Now that I've heard the difference I may well explore further in months to come.

Edit: and sorry if this went off Qutest discussions a little, so will add that I've been extremely pleased with the Qutest from day one.  It's my first Chord product, but now can't see myself buying any other digital audio device that doesn't include Rob's magic.


----------



## Sound Eq

can i ask, are there any cables that i can connect qutest to the mac book pro directly through usb c and chord qutest without the need to put on adapters or usb a mac usb hub


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 24, 2018)

hello everyone, any good usb b to usb c cable to use straight from chord qutest dac to my mac 2018, something within 100 usd range

i received my google chromcast, nah i did not like it compared to listening to usb

also when i compared my mac book pro 2018 with my alienware 15 , using on both audirivana, with my chord qutest --- ifi ican pro---hifiman he1000 v2, man the macbook won hands down . used on both setups the aucharm usb cable

i could not believe how macbook gave  a way better playback sound quality than my windows, def macs are best to get best playback quality period. i wanted to test tidal as well on both setup, again tidal sounded better from mac set up

with macbook in the setup everything sounded fuller richer, better dynamics, layered. I listened to many songs, an example is dead can dance spirit chaser album. Also the war on drugs--- strangest thing, and alot more. Def macbook gave the best played compared to windows in regards to sound quality


----------



## Jon L

Sound Eq said:


> i could not believe how macbook gave  a way better playback sound quality than my windows, def macs are best to get best playback quality period.



"Windows" computers come in numerous levels of quality, and if we spend as much $$ on windows hardware as the Macbook and optimize playback software, sound quality can AT least be as good IMO...


----------



## maxh22

Chromecast needs some optimization but glad you found good results with what you already have. 

I have briefly tried my sisters 2018 MacBook Pro over usb but would still take my MSI over usb as it sounds better, and better still using optical.


----------



## dac64

Sound Eq said:


> hello everyone, any good usb b to usb c cable to use straight from chord qutest dac to my mac 2018, something within 100 usd range.



Does your mac comes with optical out? If yes, use optical cable and mac in battery mode.


----------



## Qute Beats

Sound Eq said:


> hello everyone, any good usb b to usb c cable to use straight from chord qutest dac to my mac 2018, something within 100 usd range
> 
> i received my google chromcast, nah i did not like it compared to listening to usb
> 
> ...


Never used Mac, can only guess there are differences in how USB is implemented, as already said loads of windows configurations with different USB chips controlling things.  Maybe for audio there are good and not-so good USB controller chips used on various brands motherboards?


----------



## Sound Eq

Qute Beats said:


> Never used Mac, can only guess there are differences in how USB is implemented, as already said loads of windows configurations with different USB chips controlling things.  Maybe for audio there are good and not-so good USB controller chips used on various brands motherboards?



the last mac laptop i had was 7 years ago before i was into all the head fi stuff,  i asked a friend of mine to borrow his mac to do some tests, and that is when i knew for sure the sound with using mac is way better. i did buy the Mac not for audio but i need it for other purposes


----------



## kovacs (Nov 27, 2018)

Is anyone else having problems with their left channel ?

Yesterday I suddenly lost all sound from the left channel, I've had this problem before but blamed it on my interconnect ( Signal Cable Silver Resolution ) which has a silver bullet plug, a plug which has a very small contact area with the connector that has given me problems before with other sources, usually I can solve the problem by unplugging and reconnecting it, but now I can't get a reliable connection anymore on the Qutest, the sound drops when I gently move the connector. I've tested the cable on another source and it works fine, still it could be that bullet plug which is not 100% compatible with the connectors on the Chord Qutest. To rule out the cable I tried another cable, a Kimber Hero with a ( genuine ) WBT locking connector and with this cable I can't get any connection at all, right channel works fine, left channel is silent. After this I tried a simple Audio Ghent cable with a regular ( non-locking ) RCA connector and it works but it's fragile, the connection is not stable. If I move the cable slightly to the left ( seen from above ) then I loose signal again, so now I've used some velcro tape to physically couple the left RCA cable to the right cable and gently pull the left plug towards the right plug. This seems to give a good connection and levels bewteen left and right channel seem to be even as voices come from dead center between the loudspeakers. I don't need to apply a lot of force at all so I'm really not putting a lot of stress on the ( already fragile ) connector, but it seems to work. The Signal Cable sounds better though, every time I compare it with another cable the cable sceptic in me is surprised how much better it is than any other cable I own, don't ask me why or how, but it is.

Obviously I shouldn't have to do this on such a high quality device !  I really don't want to send it in for repair and be left without a dac for weeks. As far as I can tell mine is the second report on the internet, this person reported something similar with the left channel on his Qutest DAC: https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/54163-weird-chord-qutest-behavior-looking-for-help/

I hope my trick with the velcro works and it doesn't get any worse, if it doesn't I can live with it but it's obviously not ideal. Also hope this isn't a widespread issue, the cable I used was very light and pretty flexible so it didn't put a lot of stress on the connector, also unplugged it a only couple of times. Anyone else with a similar problem ?


----------



## Zzt231gr

Mine works fine so far.I wouldn't expect this problem from a Chord product...Shame...


----------



## Sound Eq

maxh22 said:


> Chromecast needs some optimization but glad you found good results with what you already have.
> 
> I have briefly tried my sisters 2018 MacBook Pro over usb but would still take my MSI over usb as it sounds better, and better still using optical.


optimization in what way you mention about chromcast


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> optimization in what way you mention about chromcast



1: Run off powerbank, preferably the more basic ones as they sound the smoothest. 

2. Add some ferrites to the micro usb cable - This gave maybe an additional 5% improvement, I was using a small cable so it only required 2 to 3 ferrites .

3. Listen over Ethernet, everything has more weight and body and is generally smoother sounding compared to the leaner sounding WiFi 

4. Try using Roon or UPNP services such as hifi cast to send bit-perfect data to chromecast.


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 27, 2018)

i think i would like to try usb to optical converter, are there any recommended ones to use with macbook pro 2018, hopefully without a usb c to usb A adapter, something that is usb c to optical converter


----------



## plsvn

Sound Eq said:


> something that is usb c to optical converter



no such cable!

Mac computer's headphones jack also is a mini toslink out: all you need is a Mini Toslink to Toslink optical cable
Be aware, though, that optical, on Mac computers, is limited to 24/96


----------



## maxh22

plsvn said:


> no such cable!
> 
> Mac computer's headphones jack also is a mini toslink out: all you need is a Mini Toslink to Toslink optical cable
> Be aware, though, that optical, on Mac computers, is limited to 24/96



This is true only for the older macs, not 2018 model


----------



## maxh22 (Nov 27, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> i think i would like to try usb to optical converter, are there any recommended ones to use with macbook pro 2018, hopefully without a usb c to usb b adapter, something that is usb c to optical converter



You would first need to convert the type c into the standard type a, afterwords you could use any usb to optical converter.

@Hooster was using one some time ago with Mojo but I can’t recall the model number.

Edit: https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32927...BMIlW22JezrmOFALtL1iAC7LA1tJKw161543338545194


----------



## plsvn

maxh22 said:


> This is true only for the older macs, not 2018 model



oh, wow: just found that up to 192 was supported on machines released from 2014 to... 2015: then optical was completely removed from MBPs headphones jack


----------



## Sound Eq

plsvn said:


> oh, wow: just found that up to 192 was supported on machines released from 2014 to... 2015: then optical was completely removed from MBPs headphones jack





maxh22 said:


> You would first need to convert the type c into the standard type a, afterwords you could use any usb to optical converter.
> 
> @Hooster was using one some time ago with Mojo but I can’t recall the model number.
> 
> Edit: https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32927...BMIlW22JezrmOFALtL1iAC7LA1tJKw161543338545194



i will try it, is that a good one or should i aim for known brands assuming they sell converters within 100- 150 usd if its a quality one


----------



## maxh22

plsvn said:


> oh, wow: just found that up to 192 was supported on machines released from 2014 to... 2015: then optical was completely removed from MBPs headphones jack



Good thing MSI still offers Toslink out on its latest laptops 


Sound Eq said:


> i will try it, is that a good one or should i aim for known brands assuming they sell converters within 100- 150 usd if its a quality one



I would go for this one, don't see much of a reason to spend more..


----------



## nick77

Can someone please send me a screenshot of your HQP settings, I haven't been able to get it working with the Qutest. 

Thanks.........


----------



## Sound Eq

maxh22 said:


> Good thing MSI still offers Toslink out on its latest laptops
> 
> 
> I would go for this one, don't see much of a reason to spend more..


bought it, lets see what will come out of it 

since i am logged in to aliexpress any rec on optical cable


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> bought it, lets see what will come out of it
> 
> since i am logged in to aliexpress any rec on optical cable



Fantastic! I would recommend two from personal experience:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B078XG61KT/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1    -for a short cable

https://www.amazon.com/d/Fiber-Opti...7060&sr=8-2&keywords=kabeldirekt+toslink&th=1 

-Came across this post on Head-fi and found it intriguing: 
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/toslink-best-sound.877004/#post-14511899

The Blackweb toslink cable sounds great, so does the Kabeldirekt, both are good options.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Did you sort out the problem?


kovacs said:


> Is anyone else having problems with their left channel ?
> 
> Yesterday I suddenly lost all sound from the left channel, I've had this problem before but blamed it on my interconnect ( Signal Cable Silver Resolution ) which has a silver bullet plug, a plug which has a very small contact area with the connector that has given me problems before with other sources, usually I can solve the problem by unplugging and reconnecting it, but now I can't get a reliable connection anymore on the Qutest, the sound drops when I gently move the connector. I've tested the cable on another source and it works fine, still it could be that bullet plug which is not 100% compatible with the connectors on the Chord Qutest. To rule out the cable I tried another cable, a Kimber Hero with a ( genuine ) WBT locking connector and with this cable I can't get any connection at all, right channel works fine, left channel is silent. After this I tried a simple Audio Ghent cable with a regular ( non-locking ) RCA connector and it works but it's fragile, the connection is not stable. If I move the cable slightly to the left ( seen from above ) then I loose signal again, so now I've used some velcro tape to physically couple the left RCA cable to the right cable and gently pull the left plug towards the right plug. This seems to give a good connection and levels bewteen left and right channel seem to be even as voices come from dead center between the loudspeakers. I don't need to apply a lot of force at all so I'm really not putting a lot of stress on the ( already fragile ) connector, but it seems to work. The Signal Cable sounds better though, every time I compare it with another cable the cable sceptic in me is surprised how much better it is than any other cable I own, don't ask me why or how, but it is.
> 
> ...


----------



## junkjunk

Question for those technically minded. I would like to connect Qutest directly to speakers. Would these adaptors work with my existing speaker cables https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01BHVTEFW/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?smid=A1HVM0WJVUHCVV&psc=1

Maybe there's another cheap ready solution?

Thanks for your help!


----------



## tesarpa

junkjunk said:


> Question for those technically minded. I would like to connect Qutest directly to speakers. Would these adaptors work with my existing speaker cables https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01BHVTEFW/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?smid=A1HVM0WJVUHCVV&psc=1
> 
> Maybe there's another cheap ready solution?
> 
> Thanks for your help!



I don't see the point. Qutest is not an amplifier and it doesn't provide enough power to move air.


----------



## Zzt231gr

junkjunk said:


> Question for those technically minded. I would like to connect Qutest directly to speakers. Would these adaptors work with my existing speaker cables https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01BHVTEFW/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?smid=A1HVM0WJVUHCVV&psc=1
> 
> Maybe there's another cheap ready solution?
> 
> Thanks for your help!


What speakers do you have?


----------



## Zzt231gr

tesarpa said:


> I don't see the point. Qutest is not an amplifier and it doesn't provide enough power to move air.


I think Rob could answer that better...


----------



## junkjunk

Zzt231gr said:


> What speakers do you have?


ATC SCM 11 v.2


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> I think Rob could answer that better...


I struggle to see how he would come to a different conclusion.
The ATC SCM 11 v.2 are only 85 dB, so are relatively inefficient speakers.
I can direct drive 86 dB speakers using a hugo 2, set at approx 50% volume.
Do you think that the Qutest, which lacks the hugo 2 amplifier section, is going to successfully (ie that excludes having to listen with your ears only 10cm from the speakers, in order to hear any sound) power a pair of less efficient speakers?


----------



## Zzt231gr

junkjunk said:


> ATC SCM 11 v.2


If those are some power hungry speakers!


miketlse said:


> I struggle to see how he would come to a different conclusion.
> The ATC SCM 11 v.2 are only 85 dB, so are relatively inefficient speakers.
> I can direct drive 86 dB speakers using a hugo 2, set at approx 50% volume.
> Do you think that the Qutest, which lacks the hugo 2 amplifier section, is going to successfully (ie that excludes having to listen with your ears only 10cm from the speakers, in order to hear any sound) power a pair of less efficient speakers?


No-you are correct.I hoped he had some 100db easy loaders-that would be a nice experiment!


----------



## kovacs

Zzt231gr said:


> Did you sort out the problem?



No not really the connection is extremely fragile, if I move the left cable a tiny bit I loose all sound from the left channel  With some cables like the Kimber Hero with locking WBT plugs I can't get any connection at all...

It works for the moment because I have used velcro tape to stop the left cable from moving. Pffttt....


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> I hoped he had some 100db easy loaders-that would be a nice experiment!


That becomes more interesting to test.
Here are a few of Robs posts, including someone mentioning direct driving speakers from a 2Qute.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hug...-official-thread.879425/page-26#post-14257275
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hug...e-official-thread.879425/page-7#post-14233633
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hug...-official-thread.879425/page-29#post-14259399


----------



## dac64

kovacs said:


> No not really the connection is extremely fragile, if I move the left cable a tiny bit I loose all sound from the left channel  With some cables like the Kimber Hero with locking WBT plugs I can't get any connection at all...
> 
> It works for the moment because I have used velcro tape to stop the left cable from moving. Pffttt....



It could be a cold solder joint. send it to Chord.


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> It could be a cold solder joint. send it to Chord.


+1
And ask what the problem is.


----------



## Jon L

Received Chord Qutest, and even without audio testing, I am immediately disappointed by the build quality of included wall wart power supply.  The slot where various international plugs click in has questionable build and contact quality, and depending on how one clicks in the square plug and how the wall wart is plugged in (poor grip on wall receptacle), I get intermittent power contact.  
Very poor for a $1900 product IMO.  




1130180858 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## Jon L

And the lack of power switch is super dumb.
On the other hand, the lights are pretty...




1129181909 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## nick77

Hi Jon, I tend agree with your assessment but the sound is pretty amazing. So give it some time and honestly the sooner you ditch the wallwart the better.


----------



## iaamap

Re: Wallwart, I ditched the wallwart on my former 2Qute and it mad a difference.  However, in speaking with Chord directly, the insist ditching the wallwart will do nothing.  I was considering powering it with a powerbank or some other "battery" device.    Thoughts? and Thanks


----------



## nick77 (Nov 30, 2018)

> Re: Wallwart, I ditched the wallwart on my former 2Qute and it mad a difference. However, in speaking with Chord directly, the insist ditching the wallwart will do nothing. I was considering powering it with a powerbank or some other "battery" device. Thoughts? and Thanks




I am using a low noise LPS, I didnt try a battery pak but im sure its worth the effort.

I experienced better focus and weight to the music.


----------



## miketlse

iaamap said:


> Re: Wallwart, I ditched the wallwart on my former 2Qute and it mad a difference.  However, in speaking with Chord directly, the insist ditching the wallwart will do nothing.  I was considering powering it with a powerbank or some other "battery" device.    Thoughts? and Thanks


@Rob Watts did post about comparing the wallwart v a large battery, and could not measure any difference in the sound from the 2Qute.


----------



## Triode User

iaamap said:


> Re: Wallwart, I ditched the wallwart on my former 2Qute and it mad a difference.  However, in speaking with Chord directly, the insist ditching the wallwart will do nothing.  I was considering powering it with a powerbank or some other "battery" device.    Thoughts? and Thanks



Thoughts? Well when you spoke to Chord directly of course they are going to say what they told you. They would be crazy to say anything different.


----------



## Jon L

nick77 said:


> I am using a low noise LPS, I didnt try a battery pak but im sure its worth the effort.
> 
> I experienced better focus and weight to the music.


Which LPS are you using?

I've been comparing power supplies, including iFi iPower, Bakoon Lithium battery PS, and HDplex Linear.  I won't make much comments until I actually compare them to the stock smps, which is currently breaking in charging my Android phones 

I WILL say Lithium battery PS gives you super-creamy, buttery textures if you like that sort of thing...


----------



## kovacs (Dec 1, 2018)

dac64 said:


> It could be a cold solder joint. send it to Chord.



If I can send it directly to Chord in the UK I will, but really don't want to go through my dealer after the nightmare I just went through with another item I had issues with. Also would hate to be without this DAC for weeks... If I can't send it to Chord directly I will probably contact a local hi-fi repair shop to fix the issue, maybe even fit much higher quality connectors, less hassle and much much faster...

I have decided to just wait and deal with it after the holiday season. It works for now (and sounds great ), I placed something under the connectors to support the weight of the cable and used velcro to keep the left and right cable from moving. I hate it ( this problem literally keeps me up at night ) but it's better than the other options... This sucks !


----------



## dac64

kovacs said:


> If I can send it directly to Chord in the UK I will...



Cold soldered is easy to fix. Take your time!


----------



## dac64

Jon L said:


> the square plug and how the wall wart is plugged in (poor grip on wall receptacle)



Could it be your wall outlet? Mine is tight and secure.


----------



## nick77 (Dec 1, 2018)

> Which LPS are you using?



Jon I am using a DIY AMB Labs Sigma 11 PS with a Wywire Juice PC. I think I used a 100va 5.6amp transformer. 

https://www.amb.org/audio/sigma11/


----------



## Sound Eq

hi , does anyone have any feedback bout using this with qutest

https://lnx.m2tech.biz/products/pens/hiface-two/

if i get this , which a friend of mine is selling for cheap, what cable I need to go into the chord qutest? please send links


----------



## Sound Eq

maxh22 said:


> Fantastic! I would recommend two from personal experience:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B078XG61KT/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1    -for a short cable
> 
> ...



amazon nor on ebay any of those cables ship to Israel, which is strange because it says ships worldwide but on check out they say the do not ship to Israel, I tried so many different vendors on ebay but non ship to Israel, anything good maybe on aliexpress or maybe there is another site where to buy one of these cables, how bout blue jeans cables


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> amazon nor on ebay any of those cables ship to Israel, which is strange because it says ships worldwide but on check out they say the do not ship to Israel, I tried so many different vendors on ebay but non ship to Israel, anything good maybe on aliexpress or maybe there is another site where to buy one of these cables, how bout blue jeans cables



Unfortunately, I only have experience with these two inexpensive cables and the stock cable, if you want I could forward some cables to Israel for you provided you cover the shipping.

Here is a local ebay seller selling the Blackweb, he appears to ship worldwide
_ https://www.ebay.com/itm/BLACKWEB-D...h=item260bdfa499:g:sDcAAOSwDMZbWRCa:rk:2:pf:0

I can't vouch for any of the cables on Aliexpress but it's possible the well built basic ones also sound good...


----------



## Sound Eq

plsvn said:


> https://www.amazon.it/Oxid7-Fermapo...TF8&qid=1542747217&sr=8-1&keywords=fermaporte
> 
> but you can find it in any hardware store for way less



but what is the idea behind using those shiny things


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 1, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> Unfortunately, I only have experience with these two inexpensive cables and the stock cable, if you want I could forward some cables to Israel for you provided you cover the shipping.
> 
> Here is a local ebay seller selling the Blackweb, he appears to ship worldwide
> _ https://www.ebay.com/itm/BLACKWEB-D...h=item260bdfa499:g:sDcAAOSwDMZbWRCa:rk:2:pf:0
> ...



wow you really have solutions for everything, bought it off ebay from the link you sent.

Thanks so so much for all your replies you really are amazing

kindly  what about the BNC inputs on the qutest, and what you think going that route using hiface two
https://lnx.m2tech.biz/products/pens/hiface-two/

and what cable do I need to buy to then connect to qutest

i want to try different connection setups with qutest so please forgive my numerous questions, but to be within budget and not go over hill in spending. Also I am very curious to try our allo signature later on


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> wow you really have solutions for everything, bought it off ebay from the link you sent.
> 
> Thanks so so much for all your replies you really are amazing
> 
> ...



Thanks for the kind words, always enjoy helping a fellow Head-fier out 

So for the Hififace dongle, you would need a coax male to BNC male cable such as this one:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...n7sWK0Y5a1Kr_AaAvGxEALw_wcB&lsft=BI:514&smp=Y

I would take a guess that the optical converter will sound better than the Hififace on the Qutest...

The Allo signature looks like a much better contender, especially since Darko says it sounds better than a fully fledged Auralic Aries Femto with LPS.


----------



## Sound Eq

maxh22 said:


> Thanks for the kind words, always enjoy helping a fellow Head-fier out
> 
> So for the Hififace dongle, you would need a coax male to BNC male cable such as this one:
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/546884-REG/Pearstone_VRBC_110_BNC_Male_to_RCA.html/?ap=y&gclid=Cj0KCQiA_4jgBRDhARIsADezXcjkPQ5jbyTtmruzaYQ8dmVjpsSo32hWuSHr8LGxNn7sWK0Y5a1Kr_AaAvGxEALw_wcB&lsft=BI:514&smp=Y
> ...



in the allo signature there options for os, wonder which one is best to chose for mac, i need to make sure i will not have surprises

https://www.allo.com/sparky/digione-signature-player.html


----------



## maxh22

Sound Eq said:


> in the allo signature there options for os, wonder which one is best to chose for mac, i need to make sure i will not have surprises
> 
> https://www.allo.com/sparky/digione-signature-player.html



Your best bet is to contact them directly:
https://www.allo.com/contact/index.php


----------



## naynay (Dec 1, 2018)

> The Allo signature looks like a much better contender, especially since Darko says it sounds better than a fully fledged Auralic Aries Femto with LPS.



Allo Sig is very good i have both Aries Femto and Sig.


----------



## maxh22

Interesting feedback, is the issue present with qutest alone?


----------



## naynay

maxh22 said:


> Interesting feedback, is the issue present with qutest alone?


I was using the single S/PDIF out of the M Scaler to a secondry Dac it was this Dac which was the problem the Qutest Dac was absolutely fine.


----------



## hornytoad (Dec 1, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> Thanks for the kind words, always enjoy helping a fellow Head-fier out
> 
> So for the Hififace dongle, you would need a coax male to BNC male cable such as this one:
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/546884-REG/Pearstone_VRBC_110_BNC_Male_to_RCA.html/?ap=y&gclid=Cj0KCQiA_4jgBRDhARIsADezXcjkPQ5jbyTtmruzaYQ8dmVjpsSo32hWuSHr8LGxNn7sWK0Y5a1Kr_AaAvGxEALw_wcB&lsft=BI:514&smp=Y
> ...


Interesting because the Allo Digi One doesnt sound near as good as the Auralic Femto.


----------



## maxh22

hornytoad said:


> Interesting because the Allo Digi One doesnt sound near as good as the Auralic Femto.



Signature version


----------



## naynay

hornytoad said:


> Interesting because the Allo Digi One doesnt sound near as good as the Auralic Femto.


Its the seperate clean power supply to digi board that makes the difference i believe?


----------



## hornytoad (Dec 1, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> Signature version


Yeah I know , I have the Digi One not the Signature and its not even close to my Auralic Femto.

If they come up with a USB Bridge Signature I may buy one of those and compare. ,Of course maybe a slap a Intona Industrial USB isolator on the USB Bridge I have now which is also not close to the Auralic Femto.


----------



## maxh22

hornytoad said:


> Yeah I know , I have the Digi One not the Signature and its not even close to my Auralic Femto.
> 
> If they come up with a USB Bridge Signature I may buy one of those and compare. ,Of course maybe a slap a Intona Industrial USB isolator on the USB Bridge I have now which is also not close to the Auralic Femto.



The Signature version is in a different league to the standard if reviews are anything to go by, how about you upgrade your Digione and let us know if you still feel the same way?


----------



## hornytoad

maxh22 said:


> The Signature version is in a different league to the standard if reviews are anything to go by, how about you upgrade your Digione and let us know if you still feel the same way?


I may. I gave the Allo  Digi One to my son-in law . I really would like to see a USB Bridge Signature. I would buy that. I'm also not impressed with the ifi Power I bought that I used on both the DigiOne and USB Bridge. I actually preferred the stock 
power supply.


----------



## hornytoad

I will buy the Chord Qutest eventually but would like to see the price drop to the 2Qute level down the road. 

I have spent way too much money this year on electronics gear,particularly amps


----------



## maxh22

hornytoad said:


> I may. I gave the Allo  Digi One to my son-in law . I really would like to see a USB Bridge Signature. I would buy that. I'm also not impressed with the ifi Power I bought that I used on both the DigiOne and USB Bridge. I actually preferred the stock
> power supply.



Oh I believe you; if you like the sound of the stock ps try some power banks they almost always sound better IME.


----------



## hornytoad

maxh22 said:


> Oh I believe you; if you like the sound of the stock ps try some power banks they almost always sound better IME.


Well I didn't like the sound necessarily of the stock power supply, just thought it was better than the IFI


----------



## maxh22

hornytoad said:


> Well I didn't like the sound necessarily of the stock power supply, just thought it was better than the IFI



Let me guess the Ifi sounded a little brighter/ leaner and stock PS warmer and full-bodied?


----------



## hornytoad

maxh22 said:


> Let me guess the Ifi sounded a little brighter/ leaner and stock PS warmer and full-bodied?


I thought they both sounded lean but yes i would say the IFI SUCKED the life out of the music.


----------



## maxh22

hornytoad said:


> I thought they both sounded lean but yes i would say the IFI SUCKED the life out of the music.



Powerbanks tend to have a fuller more fleshed out and musical sound. Some powerbanks sound better than others though so give it a try and see what you think!


----------



## hornytoad (Dec 1, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> Powerbanks tend to have a fuller more fleshed out and musical sound. Some powerbanks sound better than others though so give it a try and see what you think!


I use a PS Audio Dectet Conditioner for this system Oh also Ps Audio Dectet outlet on a dedicated circuit .


----------



## Nik74

hornytoad said:


> I use a PS Audio Dectet Conditioner for this system



The Dectet was a very positive change for my system too.


----------



## hornytoad

Nik74 said:


> The Dectet was a very positive change for my system too.


For the money , It is incredible. I think you would have to pay substantially more for the same results with most power conditioners ,etc. I have 4 of them in separate systems


----------



## hornytoad

Anyway , i don't want to hijack this thread . Back to the Chord Qutest. I had a 2Qute that I liked very much but sold it. Should have kept it. 

Is the Qutest an noticeable improvement over the 2qute?


----------



## peter1480

Sound Eq said:


> amazon nor on ebay any of those cables ship to Israel, which is strange because it says ships worldwide but on check out they say the do not ship to Israel, I tried so many different vendors on ebay but non ship to Israel, anything good maybe on aliexpress or maybe there is another site where to buy one of these cables, how bout blue jeans cables



https://www.teddypardo.com/powersupplies/usb-psus/teddyusb.html based in Israel and very good.


----------



## Sound Eq

naynay said:


> Allo Sig is very good i have both Aries Femto and Sig.





peter1480 said:


> https://www.teddypardo.com/powersupplies/usb-psus/teddyusb.html based in Israel and very good.



nice never heard of him, he has everything which leads me to ask then what is best to buy from him to get best sound, what configuration combo should i go for


----------



## SoundeScapes

hornytoad said:


> Is the Qutest an noticeable improvement over the 2qute?



Yes in my opinion it is. I upgraded to Qutest from 2Qute.
During the first seconds of listening to it I thought they sounded exactly the same.
They have the same character or sound signature. Which is a good thing IMO.
But after a short while I noticed the differences. There were some extra details revealed.
The soundstage had slightly more depth and it had a bit more analog feel to it, as in less harsh.
Apart from the sound of it it has a more easily accesible input switch, you can choose the output
Voltage between 1, 2 and 3V and it is heavier.
It's more an evolution than revolution I think. The revolution part of it however might be the possibility to add
a M Scaler due to the dual BNC inputs. 
If you liked 2Qute I'm absolutely positive that you will really like and appreciate the Qutest.


----------



## boxerlc

Is the USB input always better than the spdif inputs on the Qutest? If I use a really good spdif source, will it outperform the USB input?


----------



## Triode User

boxerlc said:


> Is the USB input always better than the spdif inputs on the Qutest? If I use a really good spdif source, will it outperform the USB input?



Have you tried Optical? That way you get RF noise isolation.

The best way is to try all three yourself though. Generally you are looking for the least bright sound and darkest sound as this indicates the least RF noise on the system.


----------



## boxerlc

Triode User said:


> Have you tried Optical? That way you get RF noise isolation.
> 
> The best way is to try all three yourself though. Generally you are looking for the least bright sound and darkest sound as this indicates the least RF noise on the system.


I tried the new U16 bridge and Allo Digione with qutest, the USB output is always better. I'm wondering if better bridge would make a difference, that's why I'm asking that question, to avoid going to a wrong path. Thank you for your reply.


----------



## Triode User

boxerlc said:


> I tried the new U16 bridge and Allo Digione with qutest, the USB output is always better. I'm wondering if better bridge would make a difference, that's why I'm asking that question, to avoid going to a wrong path. Thank you for your reply.



It depends on what you mean by 'better'. It is easy to think a digital source is better because it gives more depth or soundstage or detail or realism etc etc but all of these are just RF noise artifacts and the source is in reality worse. Always look for the darkest, least bright sound. So if the bridge is quieter for RF noise output then it may well be better.


----------



## Lodwales81

I have the sotm sms 200 with a dedicated power supply and it made a big difference for me in sound quality, when I try and switch back to optical the sound seems lifeless.


----------



## Triode User

Lodwales81 said:


> I have the sotm sms 200 with a dedicated power supply and it made a big difference for me in sound quality, when I try and switch back to optical the sound seems lifeless.



Hmmn, by my standards it may be that the ‘lifeless’ optical is in fact the better signal. Just think where the ‘life’ is coming from with the sotm sms 200 with dedicated power supply. It is not altering the digital signal. The ‘life’ may therefore be RF noise, possibly even from the dedicated power supply.


----------



## Nik74 (Dec 8, 2018)

A few months ago someone here likened RF noise characteristics to MSG in food. I thought it was spot on. As in who doesn't like the odd Chinatown meal with a bit of msg to make food taste 'better'? If you  get your palate used to the artificial richness, trying more refined  cuisine might initially taste bland in comparison. Similarly wiht sonics , you can get used to RF and end up missing it when it is not there but it is worth training your ears to be able to hear the difference. I m grateful for people on these forums that pointed this out to me when I was making my comparisons and considered the switch.
And when discernment is there, you can always enjoy both paths


----------



## boxerlc

Triode User said:


> It depends on what you mean by 'better'. It is easy to think a digital source is better because it gives more depth or soundstage or detail or realism etc etc but all of these are just RF noise artifacts and the source is in reality worse. Always look for the darkest, least bright sound. So if the bridge is quieter for RF noise output then it may well be better.


By better I mean wider and deeper sound stage, more delicate image and better transparency. The sound of the USB input also sounds more relaxed.


----------



## boxerlc

Nik74 said:


> A few months ago someone here likened RF noise characteristics to MSG in food. I thought it was spot on. As in who doesn't like the odd Chinatown meal with a bit of msg to make food taste 'better'? If you  get your palate used to the artificial richness, trying more refined  cuisine might initially taste bland in comparison. Similarly wiht sonics , you can get used to RF and end up missing it when it is not there but it is worth training your ears to be able to hear the difference. I m grateful for people on these forums that pointed this out to me when I was making my comparisons and considered the switch.
> And when discernment is there, you can always enjoy both paths


I don't think MSG is a good metaphor for RF noise. Because MSG is a just another kind of sodium that is used to add a flavor called 'umami'. It is no better or worse than salt, it's only used to balance the flavor. You can use it to make healthy and delicious food, but if you add it too much, it will help develop high blood pressure. On the other hand, RF noise is just noise, you don't want any amount of it. So I will link msg to equalizer and RF noise to the dirt in your food, it's not clean, but might add some texture to you food.


----------



## Triode User

boxerlc said:


> I don't think MSG is a good metaphor for RF noise. Because MSG is a just another kind of sodium that is used to add a flavor called 'umami'. It is no better or worse than salt, it's only used to balance the flavor. You can use it to make healthy and delicious food, but if you add it too much, it will help develop high blood pressure. On the other hand, RF noise is just noise, you don't want any amount of it. So I will link msg to equalizer and RF noise to the dirt in your food, it's not clean, but might add some texture to you food.



I love it. *RF noise is like dirt in your food, it's not clean, but might add some texture to your food.*
Hilarious and accurate as well. Excellent.


----------



## tunes

mtmercer said:


> Throw in this one so it is comprehensive:
> 
> 
> I understand it enhances the timbre and is very analogue like.



Can the hamsters charge your cell phone so you can be off the grid?


----------



## betula

Is there any 2Qute owner (or previous 2Qute owner) who upgraded to the Qutest? 

To my experience Chord builds the best DACs. The transparency, separation, spaciousness, dynamics, control, speed, tightness, details are just outstanding. 
I am pretty much on a budget, £500 is quite a step for me. At the moment I use a 2Qute to my Questyle CMA-600i. 2Qute vastly improves the built in DAC of the 600i.
I also use an iFi iPurifier 3 which adds extra cleanliness and air to the picture. I simply can't listen without this tiny device anymore. 

I am very happy with my current system, but you know, you constantly look for improvements in this hobby. 

My question after describing my circumstances is whether the upgrade to the Qutest really worth it sound-wise? I heard it is not _that_ far from 2Qute. Especially if I further clean the signal with the  iPurifier 3 I guess. Any thoughts from someone who knows both 2Qute and Qutest? (I also have to add I paid only £500 for my 2Qute. Therefore upgrading to the Qutest would mean paying more than double for any sonic improvements.)


----------



## boxerlc

betula said:


> Is there any 2Qute owner (or previous 2Qute owner) who upgraded to the Qutest?
> 
> To my experience Chord builds the best DACs. The transparency, separation, spaciousness, dynamics, control, speed, tightness, details are just outstanding.
> I am pretty much on a budget, £500 is quite a step for me. At the moment I use a 2Qute to my Questyle CMA-600i. 2Qute vastly improves the built in DAC of the 600i.
> ...


I had a 2qute and than change it to qutest. I didn't own both at the same time, so I couldn't really compare them. I will say the sound signature is still the same and I don't hear night and day difference in performance. 

You get double the taps but not necessarily double the sound quality. I think the biggest improvement come from the build quality and supported sample rate. It feels like a safe but not very big upgrade for me.


----------



## Nik74

I ll agree with @boxerlc on this. I have a Hugo which employs the same DAC stage as your 2 Qute - as Qutest is the same DAC as Hugo2- and recently got the Qutest. I compared them extensively and yes there is a marked difference in sound quality but it is not night and day. If you are happy with your set up and are on a budget right now, I d save the ££. On the other hand if you have been bitten by the upgrade bug, there are dealers that might give you a good part exchange rate for your 2Qute and you might not have to spend much more than £500 for the Qutest. 
What headphones/speakers are you using?


----------



## betula

Nik74 said:


> I ll agree with @boxerlc on this. I have a Hugo which employs the same DAC stage as your 2 Qute - as Qutest is the same DAC as Hugo2- and recently got the Qutest. I compared them extensively and yes there is a marked difference in sound quality but it is not night and day. If you are happy with your set up and are on a budget right now, I d save the ££. On the other hand if you have been bitten by the upgrade bug, there are dealers that might give you a good part exchange rate for your 2Qute and you might not have to spend much more than £500 for the Qutest.
> What headphones/speakers are you using?


I am running a LCD-2C at the moment. I just need that bass extension and punch with my mostly bass-centric modern music. I prefer the 2C vs the Clear which I also owned.


----------



## Nik74

Sounds like a very pleasing  set up


----------



## betula

Nik74 said:


> Sounds like a very pleasing  set up


It is indeed. Combining the extension, punch, slam and authority of Audeze bass with the most possible clarity, tightness and cleanliness coming from the 2Qute. The 600i gives the current (and power) and makes this clear and punchy, powerful picture a bit smoother, sweeter and more awesome. I am a very happy camper at the moment, especially if I am looking at the price/performance ratio of my system.


----------



## gasmonkey

Qutest takes things to a whole new level. Every sound from the deepest of bass to highest treble is better. Separation of instruments and notes is incredible. It doesnt seem to matter how high the treble or low the bass, sounds dont meld. The depth and placement of instruments on the soundstage natural and precise.

Sounded so good I had to sacrifice the TV and table in the living room and get it out of the way of the Vandy 3a's rear firing bass.

I've never heard a better soundstage and placement of instruments.


----------



## SoundeScapes

betula said:


> Is there any 2Qute owner (or previous 2Qute owner) who upgraded to the Qutest?
> 
> To my experience Chord builds the best DACs. The transparency, separation, spaciousness, dynamics, control, speed, tightness, details are just outstanding.
> I am pretty much on a budget, £500 is quite a step for me. At the moment I use a 2Qute to my Questyle CMA-600i. 2Qute vastly improves the built in DAC of the 600i.
> ...



I posted my impressions a few pages back, #2533, in response to ”hornytoad” asking the same question and I agree with the answers you got.
The sound signature is identical with the Qutest adding some refinement. It’s not a night and day difference
but rather the next step in the evolution of Chord sound. If you have to pay more than double what you payed for 2Qute
I’d think twice about it. Best thing as always is if you can arrange a home demo.
And by the way even the Qutest respond, if ever so slightly, to different PSU’s.


----------



## AndrewOld

There is an extremely positive and favourable review of the Qutest in this month’s Stereophile.


----------



## canali (Dec 9, 2018)

subbed.
this qutest does most interest me.

might go for this qutest dac with the *monoprice cavelli liquid platinum*
or *woo wa22.*..or others....i like how with the qutest filters you can tweak the
sound slightly for better matching to an amp. (anyone tried the qutest with the cavelli?)


----------



## musickid

In the pursuit of the most intoxicating blissful musical experience one has to employ a "cost no object" frame of mind. i've gone from a yulong u100 to a hugo2/hms it's fantastic.


----------



## TLS1 (Dec 13, 2018)

Hi,
Has anyone tried the new Jplay Femto with the Qutest? I could make it work with  Chord Kernel streaming driver + dac link at 45hz + Ultrastream + force Bitstream at 24 Bit. Are there other settings that would work?


----------



## canali (Dec 13, 2018)

tempted for this...can get one for cdn1900


----------



## Dave S

Good user review of RME ADI-2 DAC vs Qutest:-

https://hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/131055-dac-off-part-2-qutest-vs-rme-adi-2-dac/


----------



## AlexB73 (Dec 17, 2018)

Dave S said:


> Good user review of RME ADI-2 DAC vs Qutest:-
> 
> https://hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/131055-dac-off-part-2-qutest-vs-rme-adi-2-dac/



If this guy like 2qute whith Mcru power supply(that sounds horrible) and don't hear difference between Qutest and cheap DAC or he use very bad low resolution system. [Edited by Mod]


----------



## Arniesb (Dec 17, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> If this guy like 2qute whith Mcru power supply(that sounds horrible) and don't hear difference between Qutest and cheap DAC or he use very bad low resolution system. [Edited by Mod]


some people just like to bash succesfull companies for no reason ... Generaly some people dont like resolving gear that exposes problems of their systems. Lower end dacs dont expose problems like good dacs do so that the case maybe?


----------



## betula

Arniesb said:


> some people just like to bash succesfull companies for no reason ... Generaly some people dont like resolving gear that exposes problems of their systems. Lower end dacs dont expose problems like good dacs do so that the case maybe?


On Qutest's level everything becomes personal. Some people absolutely go crazy for sushi, some hate it. It is a matter of taste and hearing.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> On Qutest's level everything becomes personal. Some people absolutely go crazy for sushi, some hate it. It is a matter of taste and hearing.


ye youre right. I just dont think that chord dacs bright... Sabre dacs are bright, but i think Chord tuning is spot on. Maybe if 1 have analytical headphones then they prefer warmer tuning. But 2qute and Dave i heard sounded very spot on.


----------



## betula

Arniesb said:


> ye youre right. I just dont think that chord dacs bright... Sabre dacs are bright, but i think Chord tuning is spot on. Maybe if 1 have analytical headphones then they prefer warmer tuning. But 2qute and Dave i heard sounded very spot on.


I agree with you. I am quite treble sensitive, but can't imagine having anything else than a Chord DAC. They are just so revealing, spacious, detailed, natural. I love the soundstage depth and airiness they give. That said I am into darker and warmer headphones, currently running LCD2C.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> I agree with you. I am quite treble sensitive, but can't imagine having anything else than a Chord DAC. They are just so revealing, spacious, detailed, natural. I love the soundstage depth and airiness they give. That said I am into darker and warmer headphones, currently running LCD2C.


I dont like many headphones to have, but im missing HD650 these days... Might as well buy some audeze later...


----------



## AlexB73

Sorry. Maybe I was too rude.
But sometimes people compensate an odd sound of their system with one odd sounding component that corrects sound of this system.
And to see a difference between different sources you need to have speakers and amplifier on appropriate level.
You can't listen difference of source transparency thought muddy amplifier and speakers.
But sometimes oddly emphases upper mid (like for example, 2qute with MCRU power supply) will let you feel - yes this source is "detailed"..
Chord DACs with their regular power supplies has very good and musical balance.
I compared Mojo to iFi iDSD Black. In my system both had a good tonal balance, but a difference in the level of transparency was very obvious.
Mojo was much better DAC in this regard.
But I had 2qute and it sounds bigger and much more transparent and alive compared to Mojo.


----------



## betula

AlexB73 said:


> Sorry. Maybe I was too rude.
> But sometimes people compensate an odd sound of their system with one odd sounding component that corrects sound of this system.
> And to see a difference between different sources you need to have speakers and amplifier on appropriate level.
> You can't listen difference of source transparency thought muddy amplifier and speakers.
> ...


I completely agree with you on Mojo/iDSD BL/2Qute comparison. I came to the same conclusions on them.


----------



## AlexB73

Someone connects $2K DAC to a boombox and try to judge this DAC.


----------



## GreenBow

Arniesb said:


> ye youre right. I just dont think that chord dacs bright... Sabre dacs are bright, but i think Chord tuning is spot on. Maybe if 1 have analytical headphones then they prefer warmer tuning. But 2qute and Dave i heard sounded very spot on.





betula said:


> I agree with you. I am quite treble sensitive, but can't imagine having anything else than a Chord DAC. They are just so revealing, spacious, detailed, natural. I love the soundstage depth and airiness they give. That said I am into darker and warmer headphones, currently running LCD2C.



Agreed. I do not find Mojo or Hugo 2 bright. Ridiculous to even suggest it.

Funny that we are having the same conversation in the TT 2 thread. Like someone is stirring up trouble.


----------



## soares (Dec 14, 2018)

Arniesb said:


> ye youre right. I just dont think that chord dacs bright... Sabre dacs are bright, but i think Chord tuning is spot on. Maybe if 1 have analytical headphones then they prefer warmer tuning. But 2qute and Dave i heard sounded very spot on.


I am sorry to disagree but I find my Oppo 205 warmer than my Qutest. I own both.


----------



## aaronlam123

I have a 2Qute paired with a SRM-323S and SR-404 (which I am selling to upgrade to L700 or up), and the major difference I found compared to previous dacs was the dynamics. The loud and soft parts of a song can clearly be heard. I've heard and held a Qutest in my hands before, and while I can't say how the sound compares,  it feels so much more substantial in the hand (due to the weight and brick design).


----------



## Slaphead (Dec 17, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> If this guy like 2qute whith Mcru power supply(that sounds horrible) and don't hear difference between Qutest and cheap DAC or he use very bad low resolution system. [Edited by Mod]



Have you ever heard the ADI-2 DAC, moreover have you ever heard in direct comparison to the Qutest?

I ask this because I recently bought an ADI-2 DAC. It was an "any port in a storm" kind of thing - one of my old audio monitors died and I need to replace them, but I replaced with some that were considerably more powerful. This meant that I discovered that at low level listening my audio interface had a channel imbalance on the volume pot. OK, so I thought I might as well upgrade the audio interface as well. I did my research and the ADI-2 DAC ticked all of the boxes for my requirements and the reviews seemed favourable, so I ordered it unheard, knowing I could return it.

When I put it in my system I was blown away by the level of detail, depth, soundstage positioning both left to right and front to back - I was a very happy chappy, however there was this niggle that I had that was saying "should I have gone Hugo2"

Well, to find out I booked some time at my local Chord dealer to listen to the Hugo2, and yesterday I went there with the ADI-2 DAC to do a face off. 50% of the testing was done using the dealers Beyer DT1990 Pro as these are the headphones I use for mixing, and really with these headphones there was nothing to call between the two. I felt that the Hugo2 had touch more air, but the ADI-2 was more touch more solid in it's presentation, but this was splitting hairs, it was 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

So we moved up to the high end stuff - Utopias, LCD4s, and to be honest the same thing happened. Both provided a level of detail that I couldn't differentiate between, but as before the Hugo2 had a touch more air and the ADI being a touch more solid. At times I felt that the Hugo2 had the edge with the high end headphones, but I was also aware that maybe I wanted to like the Hugo2 more as I'd been eyeing up the Hugo2 for sometime, had read all of the praise heaped upon it, was already an impressed Mojo owner.

So I took a break, went outside for some fresh air, and tried to get my mind into an objective state.

I went back in and back to the listening determined to be completely objective, and the end result was that it was simply too close to call. Then I decided to do the acid test - the HD800. I don't own a pair because while I truly appreciate the technical ability of the headphone, it's one that I simply couldn't live with through potential fatigue. No matter what filter I used on the Hugo2 I couldn't get a sound that wouldn't end up fatiguing me, on the ADI-2 DAC I simply knocked the treble down slightly and gave it a slight bass boost, and suddenly I has a pair of HD800's that I could listen too all day with no loss of detail.

So the end result is that the ADI-2 DAC is on my desk this morning and not the Hugo2. I still feel that the Hugo2 had slightly, and I mean very slightly more authority with the higher end stuff, but that's all it is, a feeling, a very subjective thing.

Oh, and also the dealer is now trying to source RME gear - he was impressed as well.

Given that the Qutest is essentially the Hugo2 without the headphone amp then I would expect there would be little to call SQ wise between the Qutest and the ADI-2 to my ears, and the feature set of the ADI-2 makes it a clear winner for my particular usage case.

*[RANT ON]*

[Removed by Mod: reminder, in the future report the post but DO NOT REPLY to the post. It’s just added work for mods to review]

*[/RANT OFF]*


----------



## Nik74 (Dec 17, 2018)

[Edited by Mod]

However, with the utmost respect to your gear preference it still begs questioning that you will insist on the superiority of a non chord dac in this particular thread. A bit like waving a raw steak to the lions and expecting a gentle response... please understand that I far from condone fan boy attitude but at the same time I question deliberately provocative posts. What would it be like do you think if someone went in the Adi thread and insistedly praised any other dac against it?

Maybe we need another thread with mid price dac comparisons, you could start one

To those of you that feel so ready to attack or belittle others opinions with such lack of respect, get a grip and be kind , please, or if you feel someone is trolling , don’t feed them


----------



## stuart1927 (Dec 17, 2018)

[Edited by Mod]
In this case AlexB73...Has clearly done a quite thorough comparison and he states his opinion. Many people read this particular thread to get impressions on the Qutest. I certainly did before I bought mine. However it's pretty useful in my view if someone gives some information or views on alternatives, and this is quite healthy I think. I have the qutest and think it's a great dac, but I have other DACs too, that offer something different and are more compatible with the system or application I'm using. I think it's one thing to come onto a forum and bash a component with no specific knowledge or comparison. In this case Alex clearly was just giving an honest and informed impression based on his experience. I think some folks just need to chill out and respect others opinions, even if they don't necessarily agree.


----------



## Slaphead

Nik74 said:


> ...However, with the utmost respect to your gear preference it still begs questioning that you will insist on the superiority of a non chord dac in this particular thread. A bit like waving a raw steak to the lions and expecting a gentle response... please understand that I far from condone fan boy attitude but at the same time I question deliberately provocative posts. What would it be like do you think if someone went in the Adi thread and insistedly praised any other dac against it?



I didn’t claim superiority of the ADI-2. Put simply I stated that despite small differences I could find no meaningful difference in the sound quality between the Hugo2 and the ADI-2 from an objective point of view, and the ADI-2 won out for me because the feature set was more applicable to my particular situation. It may be that the differences that I noticed may mean far more for somebody else. I’m certainly not dissing the Hugo2, and by the same reasoning I’m not dissing the Qutest.


----------



## canali (Dec 17, 2018)

AlexB73 said:


> Sorry. Maybe I was too rude.
> But sometimes people compensate an odd sound of their system with one odd sounding component that corrects sound of this system.
> And to see a difference between different sources you need to have speakers and amplifier on appropriate level.
> You can't listen difference of source transparency thought muddy amplifier and speakers.
> ...



to you it was superior (mojo over ifi black)...in a number of other reviews i've read similar...or the opposite
(ifi was superior)...or a tie....at this level (they're similarly priced btw) i'm sure it's not day/night difference in either case...
both are great products at their respective price points.
(i have the mojo, had the ifi idsd silver)

[Edited by Mod]


----------



## betula (Dec 17, 2018)

canali said:


> to you it was superior (mojo over ifi black)...in a number of other reviews i've read similar...or the opposite
> (ifi was superior)...or a tie....at this level (they're similarly priced btw) i'm sure it's not day/night difference in either case...
> both are great products at their respective price points.
> 
> [Edited by Mod]


It is never good to call each other on names.
I loved Mojo and owned iFi BL too. They are somewhat on the same level, but IMO Mojo is more advanced. Some folks however can't hear it and prefer the BL. And there is nothing wrong with it.
The BL has more bass, offers a thicker and more fulfilling sound signature. Mojo however sounds airier, more detailed, definitely has more soundstage depth and more details as a result of this but can sound leaner in comparison. Mojo is more 3D-like and has a bit of higher resolution. IFi BL is more powerful, smoother and sounds bigger, thicker. While I think Mojo is technologically more advanced, I can understand folks who prefer the fuller (and more 2D-like sound) of the BL. 
I think it is a matter of openness. Whether you are opened to the qualities that a Chord DAC brings to the picture and you can appreciate these qualities enough. Some might prefer a thick and bassy sound vs. the vastness and clarity of Chord DACs. Regardless the number of taps.


----------



## AlexB73 (Dec 16, 2018)

Fist of all I don't like to listen hadphones at all. I have to listen headphones at work because I don't have a choice.
I never listen hedphones at home.
I use AEON C at my work. But with AEON I can't hear even 10% of differences between DACs that I hear on my speakers Altec604e and 300b SET.
As DAC Mojo is significantly better than iFi iDSD BL. It is much more transparent and accurate in term of timing.
But like headphone amp Mojo works well only with high sinsetive hedphones like Grado, Oppo pm3.
Even with AEON I feel lack of power. If you need to drive something like Audeze LCD2 iDSD will overperform Mojo for sure !


----------



## canali (Dec 16, 2018)

betula said:


> It is never good to call each other on names.
> I loved Mojo and owned iFi BL too. They are somewhat on the same level, but IMO Mojo is more advanced. Some folks however can't hear it and prefer the BL. And there is nothing wrong with it.
> The BL has more bass, offers a thicker and more fulfilling sound signature. Mojo however sounds airier, more detailed, definitely has more soundstage depth and more details as a result of this but can sound leaner in comparison. Mojo is more 3D-like and has a bit of higher resolution. IFi BL is more powerful, smoother and sounds bigger, thicker. While I think Mojo is technologically more advanced, I can understand folks who prefer the fuller (and more 2D-like sound) of the BL.
> I think it is a matter of openness. Whether you are opened to the qualities that a Chord DAC brings to the picture and you can appreciate these qualities enough. Some might prefer a thick and bassy sound vs. the vastness and clarity of Chord DACs. Regardless the number of taps.



and i'm glad you noted this is only your opinion.
Because i've just read online reviews noting the opposite: people preferred the ifi black for similar reasons/prefs.
bottom line: whatever floats your boat based on income, costs, hearing issues, technical listening skills, prefs, form factor, options, etc.
...for some it's even using the good bang for buck audioquest dragonfly red.
which still rocks for the ultimate portable dac/form factor with my ipod touch/tidal.

this said, i am looking at this Qutest, schiit gumby/multibit.or the R2R amongst others as an upgrade over my mojo in the spring.

*also will be interesting to see what the Jan CES shows reveals from the major players.*

***lastly i was talking to a drummer who uses studio recording professonal dacs vs the consumer ones*.
says they're often cheaper and better sounding than many of the consumer oriented ones.
suggested names like the *B2 Boomer,  Larvy, Prism Sound, Forssell, Burl.
*
can anyone comment?


----------



## Slaphead

betula said:


> It is never good to call each other on names.
> I loved Mojo and owned iFi BL too. They are somewhat on the same level, but IMO Mojo is more advanced. *Some folks however can't hear it and prefer the BL*. And there is nothing wrong with it.
> The BL has more bass, offers a thicker and more fulfilling sound signature. Mojo however sounds airier, more detailed, definitely has more soundstage depth and more details as a result of this but can sound leaner in comparison. Mojo is more 3D-like and has a bit of higher resolution. IFi BL is more powerful, smoother and sounds bigger, thicker. While I think Mojo is technologically more advanced, I can understand folks who prefer the fuller (and more 2D-like sound) of the BL.
> I think it is a matter of openness. *Whether you are opened to the qualities that a Chord DAC brings to the picture and you can appreciate these qualities enough*. Some might prefer a thick and bassy sound vs. the vastness and clarity of Chord DACs. Regardless the number of taps.



Well done, you didn't actually manage call anybody any names, but it was close.

You do realise what you did there was to imply that those who prefer the iFi black label were hearing impaired, and then followed that up by effectively saying that those who preferred something other than a Chord DAC were closed minded and uncultured.

This is a bloody cult isn't it. A dogma. You do realise that this single minded attitude displayed by various people is actually probably quite damaging to Chord themselves, a company that I also have a lot of respect for, given that potential future customers probably read Head-Fi as well.

I give up, I'm going for a beer.


----------



## AlexB73

Sorry, I didn’t hear ADI-2 DAC. 
I just read Innerfidelity review of this DAC.
It is not cheap made DAC. It built on very good DAC chip, it has serious DSP internal processing. And typically for professional equipment it is a good value for money.
But, what set apart Cord DACs for me compared most other DAC, is timing accuracy. I know, most of audiophiles don’t care about timing accuracy. Because that, belt drive turntables (most of them have horrible timing) are much more popular than idler and direct drive turntables.
Also, all Chord DACs are very good balanced. Not cold and analytical and not to worm and lush.


----------



## betula

Slaphead said:


> Well done, you didn't actually manage call anybody any names, but it was close.
> 
> You do realise what you did there was to imply that those who prefer the iFi black label were hearing impaired, and then followed that up by effectively saying that those who preferred something other than a Chord DAC were closed minded and uncultured.
> 
> ...


Oh, man. I can see now you were only looking for a good argument. And if you can't win it, you rather go for a beer. Enjoy.


----------



## Slaphead

betula said:


> Oh, man. I can see now you were only looking for a good argument. And if you can't win it, you rather go for a beer. Enjoy.



I've already won the argument for my own sakes, but I have to admit defeat in that I doubt I'll ever get through to a Chord die hard that, yes, there is life outside and there are equally good alternatives.

I wish you well in your audio endeavours, sincerely I do, as I hope you wish me well in mine.


----------



## betula

Slaphead said:


> I've already won the argument for my own sakes, but I have to admit defeat in that I doubt I'll ever get through to a Chord die hard that, yes, there is life outside and there are equally good alternatives.
> 
> I wish you well in your audio endeavours, sincerely I do, as I hope you wish me well in mine.


Sure I do mate. Happy listening.


----------



## Dave S (Dec 17, 2018)

Slaphead said:


> Have you ever heard the ADI-2 DAC, moreover have you ever heard in direct comparison to the Qutest?
> 
> I ask this because I recently bought an ADI-2 DAC. It was an "any port in a storm" kind of thing - one of my old audio monitors died and I need to replace them, but I replaced with some that were considerably more powerful. This meant that I discovered that at low level listening my audio interface had a channel imbalance on the volume pot. OK, so I thought I might as well upgrade the audio interface as well. I did my research and the ADI-2 DAC ticked all of the boxes for my requirements and the reviews seemed favourable, so I ordered it unheard, knowing I could return it.
> 
> ...



Same here, Hugo 2 was not in the same league and I sold mine.

The Hugo / Qutest sound has a processed edge to it, as if it is doing some sort of mild DSP...


----------



## Slaphead (Dec 16, 2018)

Dave S said:


> Same here, Hugo 2 was not in the same league and I sold mine.
> 
> The Hugo / Qutest sound has a processed edge to it, as if it is doing some sort of mild DSP...



Well personally I thought they were about even - give or take. I'd happily own one or the other, or both . However, as I said, once sound was out of the way it was the feature set of the ADI-2, and it's suitability for my needs that swung it for me.

Edit: Anyway I'm going to bow out now and hopefully put this thread back on the topic of the Qutest, which is after all what this thread is about.


----------



## GreenBow (Dec 17, 2018)

In defence of the Hugo 2 and I guess the Qutest. It took me a month to adjust to the Hugo 2. That was from having a Mojo in use all the time before.

At first the Hugo 2 simply outfaced me with detail and I could barely place it all. I had to adjust to the new soundstage. Tonality etc. However even from the start I could tell that the Hugo 2 was right. I knew though, how long it took me to adjust to the Mojo. Thus when I got the Hugo 2, and was knocked out by how good it was.  I just played music for a month to get used to it. Even to this day (exactly a year later) I can not believe my ears with the Hugo 2.

When folk talk about other DACs being thicker sounding, are they doing it right? Rob Watts puts huge super-caps in the TT range to get full current when needed, to get full musicality. .. Many other DACs are probably just adding bass.; thus losing definition.

It doesn't mean either that the Hugo 2 then sounds thin. Far from it. ... However with extra detail on notes, and maybe not 100% current when needed. Then folk are going to say Chord DAC sound thin, or bright. Which is measurable and observable tosspot.

Secondly if your headphones sound bright with Chord kit, then you bought the wrong headphones. Other DACs may let you tweak bass and treble EQ etc. However it means you are now slave to your headphone choice. The reverse argument is that Chord owners are slave to their DACs. Whereas the option of a flat response DAC is ideal for me. You have to start somewhere (in my opinion.) Otherwise you have no reference sound in your system.

I really honestly think I would not buy something like HD800S. Maybe only maybe.  However until I am sure, I simply will not buy. I will never buy another bright headphone for as long as I live. I am sick of EQ. I hate it!


----------



## betula

Slaphead said:


> Well personally I thought they were about even - give or take. I'd happily own one or the other, or both . However, as I said, once sound was out of the way it was the feature set of the ADI-2, and it's suitability for my needs that swung it for me.
> 
> Edit: Anyway I'm going to bow out now and hopefully put this thread back on the topic of the Qutest, which is after all what this thread is about.


I owned and loved Mojo. I think the spacious and airy presentation it offers is exceptional in its price range. The airiness, spaciousness and natural presentation it offers I found much more enjoyable than the thicker timbre and more 'sound system-like' approach of the iDSD BL. Mojo is more refined and delicate IMO. Even though the iDSD BL can impress more if someone is completely new to higher-end audio. 

Chord DACs are nothing but impressive. I found Hugo2 impressive too. Definitely more details and better extension both to bass and treble than Mojo. Obvious leap in sound quality vs Mojo. Often you can read however, Chord DACs are exceptional but their amp section is not that great. 
While I know these circuits are pretty much one in Chord devices and you can't really speak about separate DAC and amp sections, I sort of understand the critics too. Chord DAC/amps are extremely transparent. (What I prefer.) Many audiophiles however like some coloration that an amp brings to the picture.

Atm I use a 2Qute and a CMA600i. I find this pairing exceptionally good, especially for the price. For £1200 (what I paid for the combo) 2Qute brings the extreme clarity, spaciousness and details to the picture while the CMA600i adds extra extension, a bit of body and thickness while remaining neutral, extra spacious, and detailed with good macro and micro dynamics. The Questyle amp adds smoothness and fun to the Chord DAC. Perhaps this is the most enjoyable, fatigue-free and smooth presentation while maintaining the most details, sound-stage and all SS goodness in a current-mode presentation.  

I think, this system rivals Hugo2. In fact I'd choose my setup vs Hugo2 alone.

I was also wondering about getting a Hugo TT. After a very brief listening Hugo TT sounds more spacious and airy, while Hugo 2 sounds more natural in timbre and presentation but more intimate. Hugo2 has a smaller soundstage and a more closed in experience vs Hugo TT. 
I wish I could afford Hugo TT2, but that's very much out of my budget atm.


----------



## OG10

Hi Guys, 

I have a bit of an odd issue on my qutest. It has been running fine with absolutely no issues since purchase, and today I put the optical feed in from my CD player and it sounded a bit quiet and distorted. I have now tried all inputs and getting the same distorted very quiet sound.. have I accidentally turned on some random mode? I was looking forward to a week of chilled out listening for the xmas holidays, concerned there might be an issue now 

I have tried the 3 different volt settings and it is equally as bad. I have switched phono inputs, and have also tried another DAC which is working fine. If the issue is immediately evident to anyone please let me know if the resolution.


----------



## miketlse

betula said:


> I was also wondering about getting a Hugo TT. After a very brief listening Hugo TT sounds more spacious and airy, while Hugo 2 sounds more natural in timbre and presentation but more intimate. Hugo2 has a smaller soundstage and a more closed in experience vs Hugo TT.
> I wish I could afford Hugo TT2, but that's very much out of my budget atm.


Have you seen the AudioSanctuary deal on TT?
https://www.audiosanctuary.co.uk/chord-hugo-tt-desktop-dac-headphone-amplifier.html


----------



## betula

miketlse said:


> Have you seen the AudioSanctuary deal on TT?
> https://www.audiosanctuary.co.uk/chord-hugo-tt-desktop-dac-headphone-amplifier.html


That's a very good deal on the TT1. I have a secondhand offer of £1800 on the TT1. I am still hesitant whether if it is worth it over the Hugo2 (which you can get for £1300 secondhand) or over my current £1200 system: 2Qute and CMA600i. (RRP for my system would be £2200 atm). I am happy but always looking for improvements.


----------



## Triode User

OG10 said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> I have a bit of an odd issue on my qutest. It has been running fine with absolutely no issues since purchase, and today I put the optical feed in from my CD player and it sounded a bit quiet and distorted. I have now tried all inputs and getting the same distorted very quiet sound.. have I accidentally turned on some random mode? I was looking forward to a week of chilled out listening for the xmas holidays, concerned there might be an issue now
> 
> I have tried the 3 different volt settings and it is equally as bad. I have switched phono inputs, and have also tried another DAC which is working fine. If the issue is immediately evident to anyone please let me know if the resolution.



The question really is what did you change or do different? When you say it happened when you put the optical in from your CD player, how were you listening immediately prior to that?


----------



## OG10

Hi Sorry I meant changed input to Optical. I have tried from multiple sources now, optical / USB and it seems to be the same. I guess I'll have to contact Chord tomorrow.


----------



## GreenBow (Dec 16, 2018)

betula said:


> That's a very good deal on the TT1. I have a secondhand offer of £1800 on the TT1. I am still hesitant whether if it is worth it over the Hugo2 (which you can get for £1300 secondhand) or over my current £1200 system: 2Qute and CMA600i. (RRP for my system would be £2200 atm). I am happy but always looking for improvements.



If I were you, I would be prepared to save for the TT2. The reason being that the TT2 will support the whole one million taps of the M-Scaler. Or even for now trade in your 2Qute for the Qutest, which supports the whole M-Scaler. (Or keep your 2Qute and buy a Qutest. Whatever you know.)

I may be wrong. However the Hugo TT only supports 384KHz in, and I 'think' it will not support full M-Scaler. I think you need 768KHz in to take full advantage of M-Scaler. Whereas the majority of the magic of the m-Scaler happens between half a million, and a million taps. ... Whereas, I think 384KHz input on coaxial, means you can only utilise half of the M-Scaler taps. Check that though, because this is what I think I have learned.

As of right now, the M-Scaler might not be right up on your list. However Qutest and M-Scaler is said to be better than DAVE. What more can I say?


----------



## betula

GreenBow said:


> If I were you, I would be prepared to save for the TT2. The reason being that the TT2 will support the whole one million taps of the M-Scaler. Or even for now trade in your 2Qute for the Qutest, which supports the whole M-Scaler. (Or keep your 2Qute and buy a Qutest. Whatever you know.)
> 
> I may be wrong. However the Hugo TT only supports 384KHz in, and I 'think' it will not support full M-Scaler. I think you need 768KHz in to take full advantage of M-Scaler. Whereas the majority of the magic of the m-Scaler happens between half a million, and a million taps. ... Whereas, I think 384KHz input on coaxial, means you can only utilise half of the M-Scaler taps. Check that though, because this is what I think I have learned.
> 
> As of right now, the M-Scaler might not be right up on your list. However Qutest and M-Scaler is said to be better than DAVE. What more can I say?


I can not spend more than £2000. I don't care much about DSD, I mostly listen to FLAC.


----------



## GreenBow

betula said:


> I can not spend more than £2000. I don't care much about DSD, I mostly listen to FLAC.



I don't know what DSD has to do with it. Your choice. I would be interested in 768KHz.


----------



## Chester Rockwell

I am not someone who hears the micro differences between different inputs, nor have I ever used different power supplies on the Qutest (or any Chord DAC actually) but I did find I suffered from a little listening fatigue when running the Qutest on mains for a few hours, compared to a Poweradd Pilot Pro 2 battery pack. I also noticed when using the battery pack and optical for source, the instruments that should sound hard sounded harder and the instruments that should sound soft, sounded softer. I will caveat this with the fact that I had in the previous week been reading here, conversations between Rob and others regarding the absence of RF sounding like this, so perhaps I heard what I wanted to hear. This can definitely be a very real and powerful phenomenon by the way....I remember being completely amazed by the huge uplift in sound quality when first trying Tidal Masters, only to discover an hour or so later that I hadn’t actually enabled them. This was a very valuable lesson and has probably saved me a few quid in recent years as I now listen to new equipment and recordings very differently.

Either way, to my now very sceptical ears, optical and battery powered sounds best. Given it provides the most isolation available, that at least seems logical (YMMV). Would I be able to tell the difference in a blind test? No chance, but it is definitely the least fatiguing for me, I can listen for many hours using optical and a battery pack. That must be a good sign.

And so, after all that, my question:

@Rob Watts each time I want to listen, I just connect the battery pack to the Qutest, then disconnect when I’m done. Does this way of powering the Qutest do it any harm, compared to having it continuously powered on mains?


----------



## boxerlc

OG10 said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> I have a bit of an odd issue on my qutest. It has been running fine with absolutely no issues since purchase, and today I put the optical feed in from my CD player and it sounded a bit quiet and distorted. I have now tried all inputs and getting the same distorted very quiet sound.. have I accidentally turned on some random mode? I was looking forward to a week of chilled out listening for the xmas holidays, concerned there might be an issue now
> 
> I have tried the 3 different volt settings and it is equally as bad. I have switched phono inputs, and have also tried another DAC which is working fine. If the issue is immediately evident to anyone please let me know if the resolution.


Hey man, is the 1V output sounds less cut off than the 2V and 3V output? If so, my guess is you might get a damaged output stage, it feels like a hardware issues, try the warranty. Did you short the RCA output by any chance? What amp are you using?


----------



## odessamarin

betula said:


> I can not spend more than £2000. I don't care much about DSD, I mostly listen to FLAC.



Don't think twice. Go for Hugo TT..


----------



## OG10

Hi, I am using the Roksan K3 Integrated Amplifier - Yep the distortion just sounds worse the higher the voltage!


----------



## boxerlc (Dec 16, 2018)

I ABed Adi2 DAC and 2qute for more than a week back in the days when I own them both, both via USB input playing bit perfect audio. The resolution is the same level and same as few people said on qutest earlier, 2qute also has more airy highs and adi2 sounds more solid. It feels like ties here and the preference is only result of taste. However when I try to play some complicated music, Adi2 got a little messy while the 2qute could still provide a good saperation and stable image. I also prefer the more lively sound of the 2qute. I ended up selling both and upgraded to a quest, which keeps the most of the 2qute and has higher spec, more capabilities and much better build quality. I also hear pro gears are pretty good, so next time I would like to try something from dangerous music.


----------



## Rob Watts

OG10 said:


> Hi Sorry I meant changed input to Optical. I have tried from multiple sources now, optical / USB and it seems to be the same. I guess I'll have to contact Chord tomorrow.



Sanity check - I guess you have disconnected the PSU, waited 10 seconds and re-started? Also, try another 5v USB PSU and check the power cable too.



Chester Rockwell said:


> I am not someone who hears the micro differences between different inputs, nor have I ever used different power supplies on the Qutest (or any Chord DAC actually) but I did find I suffered from a little listening fatigue when running the Qutest on mains for a few hours, compared to a Poweradd Pilot Pro 2 battery pack. I also noticed when using the battery pack and optical for source, the instruments that should sound hard sounded harder and the instruments that should sound soft, sounded softer. I will caveat this with the fact that I had in the previous week been reading here, conversations between Rob and others regarding the absence of RF sounding like this, so perhaps I heard what I wanted to hear. This can definitely be a very real and powerful phenomenon by the way....I remember being completely amazed by the huge uplift in sound quality when first trying Tidal Masters, only to discover an hour or so later that I hadn’t actually enabled them. This was a very valuable lesson and has probably saved me a few quid in recent years as I now listen to new equipment and recordings very differently.
> 
> Either way, to my now very sceptical ears, optical and battery powered sounds best. Given it provides the most isolation available, that at least seems logical (YMMV). Would I be able to tell the difference in a blind test? No chance, but it is definitely the least fatiguing for me, I can listen for many hours using optical and a battery pack. That must be a good sign.
> 
> ...



None at all; except wearing on the connector, but pull it out at the battery side.


----------



## AnakChan

I’ve just gone around to modify a whole bunch of posts in this thread. Whilst one or two of you have done the right thing to report on a post, please refrain from replying to it. It creates a whole trail for Mods to have to review/moderate/update. Further, readers can exhibit restraint from carrying on the disagreement for multiple pages. There is nothing constructive nor educational from that. A -healthy- constructive criticism in an educational/respectful manner goes a long way than a destructive name calling criticism.


----------



## Zzt231gr (Dec 17, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> None at all; except wearing on the connector, but pull it out at the battery side.


What about being in optimal operating temperature,though?


----------



## Slaphead

canali said:


> ***lastly i was talking to a drummer who uses studio recording professonal dacs vs the consumer ones*.
> says they're often cheaper and better sounding than many of the consumer oriented ones.
> suggested names like the *B2 Boomer,  Larvy, Prism Sound, Forssell, Burl.
> *
> can anyone comment?



To be honest apart from the ADC aspect of a lot of pro DACs they're essentially the same as consumer DACs. They use the same DAC chips. They're also built to a "what goes in is what comes out" philosophy - no sweetening of the audio, which is something I think a few consumer DAC manufacturers indulge in despite seeing flat measurements.

What makes them more bang for the buck however is that they are very utilitarian in nature. Casings are typically pressed sheet metal, not oversized milled aluminium. Controls tend to be a pretty basic affair, simple push buttons and small rotary controls, information tends to be provided by banks of cheap LEDs rather than displays, some like my old Steinberg audio interface simply have one LED to indicate power.

In fact I'd go as far to say that the most expensive part of a pro DAC is the bit on the inside (electronics), whereas the most expensive part of a consumer DAC, especially the high end ones, is likely to be the bit on the outside (casing and other bling) as far as a bill of parts is concerned.

Pro audio is quite cost sensitive and business like in it's approach. If a $150 audio interface will get the job done, then it doesn't make economical sense spending $1000 or more for what is essentially the same thing. The pro audio manufacturers know this and price accordingly.

I've long been of the opinion that if you want a great sounding system at a budget price and you're not worried about aesthetics then build it from pro audio equipment.


----------



## Dave S

odessamarin said:


> Don't think twice. Go for Hugo TT..



Think twice, the Benchmark DAC3 HGC is a better dac than any Chord product apart from Dave, Dave is really very good but grossly over priced...


----------



## dac64

Dave S said:


> Think twice, the Benchmark DAC3 HGC is a better dac than any Chord product apart from Dave, Dave is really very good but grossly over priced...



Probably,  depending on which side of Atlantic!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Zzt231gr said:


> What about being in optimal operating temperature,though?


Bump!


----------



## Chester Rockwell

I think Rob has previously stated that optimal operating temperature doesn’t really apply with his DACs. They sound pretty much the same cold and warm.


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> What about being in optimal operating temperature,though?


I don't think that there is an optimal operating temperature for Robs DAC technology.
The situation is different for DACS based on R2R technology, because their resistance will vary with temperature, so their 'sound' will vary while they warm up.


----------



## ctrlm

What are the actual dB differences between the different output voltages? I swear that I saw something posted by Rob on this but I can't find it?


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> What about being in optimal operating temperature,though?



For my case, my system sounds best at 22c room temperature aand 80% humidity.

Don't  bother the equipment!


----------



## Jon L

GreenBow said:


> However Qutest and M-Scaler is said to be better than DAVE. What more can I say?



Who says that again?

Having experimented heavily with many software and hardware based upsampling in past, it is difficult for me to believe the M-Scaler would bring $4500 worth of sonic improvements, especially since my Qutest only costs $1900.  Keeping an open-mind, I would encourage Chord to trickle-down this tech and launch a more affordable M-Scaler Mini in future after they recoup the R&D costs after selling a bunch of M-Scalers..


----------



## dac64

Jon L said:


> Who says that again?



at least two blu/hms/hugo2/dave owners said that, One US and One UK.


----------



## Rob Watts

ctrlm said:


> What are the actual dB differences between the different output voltages? I swear that I saw something posted by Rob on this but I can't find it?



2v is 3.5 dB down on 3v, and 1v is 9.5 dB down on 3v.




Jon L said:


> Who says that again?
> 
> Having experimented heavily with many software and hardware based upsampling in past, it is difficult for me to believe the M-Scaler would bring $4500 worth of sonic improvements, especially since my Qutest only costs $1900.  Keeping an open-mind, I would encourage Chord to trickle-down this tech and launch a more affordable M-Scaler Mini in future after they recoup the R&D costs after selling a bunch of M-Scalers..



You can't get an assessment on the sound of the M scaler based upon other implementations, as they are not WTA. There is no point in increasing tap length using conventional filters - some only have thousands of near zero coefficients, which is completely useless, and no indication of what an M scaler will sound like.


----------



## GreenBow

Jon L said:


> Who says that again?
> 
> Having experimented heavily with many software and hardware based upsampling in past, it is difficult for me to believe the M-Scaler would bring $4500 worth of sonic improvements, especially since my Qutest only costs $1900.  Keeping an open-mind, I would encourage Chord to trickle-down this tech and launch a more affordable M-Scaler Mini in future after they recoup the R&D costs after selling a bunch of M-Scalers..



Everyone says that! Try reading the M-Scaler thread.

The last three posts in the TT2 thread covered this very topic.


----------



## Zzt231gr

So,are there any other fellow members using Poweradd Pilot Pro2 with positive results,after all these months of different conclusions?I am thinking of trying one,if there are!


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Bought Qutest today. Outstanding sound. I`m so excited to listen to my music at a new level.

@Rob Watts , sorry if it`s not the time this question asked. I assume it`s safe to leave Qutest on 24/7. But I`m using it with my laptop and frequently laptop is not on the table. Is it safe to just plug/unplug Qutest USB cable from a laptop without turning Qutest off? Should I turn it off before unplugging USB, or it would be ok just to change input to empty input? Or this doesn't matter at all?


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes as far as Qutest is concerned, you may simply pull the plug on it. It's the lap-top that needs correct disconnection, not Qutest, but simply powering down the lap-top then removing the USB cable will be best for that.


----------



## tgipier

How would a Qutest sound with HMS vs a DAVE without HMS? Is the qutest combo going to be better?


----------



## Chester Rockwell

tgipier said:


> How would a Qutest sound with HMS vs a DAVE without HMS? Is the qutest combo going to be better?



I have not seen a conclusive answer to this and I think there is probably a good reason for that. The reason DAVE sounds so good is not entirely just to do with taps. Every element in DAVE is optimised and I imagine the best available at the time of design. So although MScaler and Qutest will have far more taps, the other elements will not be as good as DAVE. How this balances out in a listening test probably makes it difficult to clearly say one is better than the other. I suspect some will prefer Qutest plus MScaler while others will prefer DAVE alone.


----------



## Zzt231gr

^^Analog stage is also a factor!


----------



## Christer (Dec 19, 2018)

tgipier said:


> How would a Qutest sound with HMS vs a DAVE without HMS? Is the qutest combo going to be better?



Well I can safely say, as far as Qutest on its own versus with M Scaler connected the difference with well recorded material and 16/44.1 in particular is HUGE imho!
I had big problems adjusting to Qutest on its own after having auditioned M Scaler.
Such big problems in fact that I have now surrendered.
There was no going back for me.
But M Scaler+ Dave is probably as good as digital currently  gets.
And  the analogue section of course matters too.
I have heard nothing better so far.
But I have not heard the latest from dCS.
But Qutest +M Scaler is so good to my ears with rbcd material that this "old dog is learning to sit".

I  basically knew the potential  of m-scaling already since last winter via DAVE /BLU 2 and now I can not only enjoy 16/44.1 with Qutest and M Scaler but will have a couple of hundred of SACDs to rip the cd layer from back home. And I have already rippped  over ten classical cds from friends  here that all  now sound surprisingly good.
But did not before.

Yesterday I even  bought the latest issue of  BBC Music magazine which came bundled with Messiaen's "Quator pour le fin de Temps."
Entirely new possibilites  to enjoy  recordings  I ignored before,are opening up for me it seems.

With all other dacs including  Qutest on its own I have not really been able to enjoy rbcd 16/44.1 recorded classical music as I can now with M Scaler.
And although it's been a while since I heard DAVE on its own, good as it was and still is, my memory of rbcd material via  DAVE is not as favourable as m-scaled with Qutest.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Zzt231gr

Zzt231gr said:


> So,are there any other fellow members using Poweradd Pilot Pro2 with positive results,after all these months of different conclusions?I am thinking of trying one,if there are!


 Anyone?


----------



## Nik74

Zzt231gr said:


> Anyone?


I ll give it a go this eve after work 
Not sure which output to use though 
, 5v/2.1A or 5v/1A ...?


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Rob Watts said:


> Yes as far as Qutest is concerned, you may simply pull the plug on it. It's the lap-top that needs correct disconnection, not Qutest, but simply powering down the lap-top then removing the USB cable will be best for that.


Thank you!


----------



## Nik74 (Dec 19, 2018)

Christer said:


> But I have not heard the latest from dCS



I have heard the dCS top stack twice, once through Wilson Alexandria and once through Wilson Sasha speakers. It was quite an experience, both times I was left bewildered at the technical prowess of that presentation and at the fact that despite the wow factor, it didn’t feel like a musical experience, I was not moved or immersed emotionally yet I should have. Dave in all settings has managed to immerse and involve me in a musical event , even with music not to my taste. The one time I didn’t enjoy a Dave set up was through the KEF flagship recently. It could have been the sub optimal room or maybe I don’t like huge speaker set ups.

Enjoy your time in the tropics


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> I ll give it a go this eve after work
> Not sure which output to use though
> , 5v/2.1A or 5v/1A ...?


Waiting for your news!Is it pilot pro2?

2.1A for sure!


----------



## Nik74

Yes , it is the one that Rob Watts uses.


----------



## GreenBow

Ragnar-BY said:


> Bought Qutest today. Outstanding sound. I`m so excited to listen to my music at a new level.
> 
> @Rob Watts , sorry if it`s not the time this question asked. I assume it`s safe to leave Qutest on 24/7. But I`m using it with my laptop and frequently laptop is not on the table. Is it safe to just plug/unplug Qutest USB cable from a laptop without turning Qutest off? Should I turn it off before unplugging USB, or it would be ok just to change input to empty input? Or this doesn't matter at all?



Haha, how is day two? They are amazing aren't they. I have Hugo 2, which is effectively the same DAC as Qutest, bar the obvious. A year later and I still can not get over it. Heheh -


----------



## Nik74

@Zzt231gr I m powering the Qutest from the Pilot 2 right now. I ve listened to it with the stock ps for about an hour first and now for the last 20 mins I have switched to the Pilot 2. Sitting here wondering why I didn't do it all this time...Take what I ll say with a pinch of salt as this today could be a particularly good eve in terms of mains quality anyway. I find the sound of the Pilot quite different. It almost feels like I ve changed the driver tube on my amp! The mids are more present and holographic, more liquid and textured. I wanna say brighter but  in a good way , there s no sibilance. I do wonder how it will sound in an SS set up though  as for my voluptious sounding valve amplifiers some of the lower mids sound a bit more contained- which is not bad as that part of the spectrum had a bit extra ''padding''-. Initial impressions all these but I will experiement further.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

GreenBow said:


> Haha, how is day two? They are amazing aren't they. I have Hugo 2, which is effectively the same DAC as Qutest, bar the obvious. A year later and I still can not get over it. Heheh -


Day two is even better  Love this feeling, when you notice new details in old tracks. Qutest gave me a lot of those moments.


----------



## dac64 (Dec 19, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> Anyone?



With the power add, rbcd format has slightly more decays, better separation  between instructments. Quietest background too!


----------



## dac64 (Dec 20, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> I m powering the Qutest from the Pilot 2 had a bit extra ''padding''-...



I stick to the stock power supply. Aĺl my gears are SS.

Btw, I have many dedicated lines, about seven.


----------



## Christer (Dec 19, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> I have heard the dCS top stack twice, once through Wilson Alexandria and once through Wilson Sasha speakers. It was quite an experience, both times I was left bewildered at the technical prowess of that presentation and at the fact that despite the wow factor, it didn’t feel like a musical experience, I was not moved or immersed emotionally yet I should have. Dave in all settings has managed to immerse and involve me in a musical event , even with music not to my taste. The one time I didn’t enjoy a Dave set up was through the KEF flagship recently. It could have been the sub optimal room or maybe I don’t like huge speaker set ups.
> 
> Enjoy your time in the tropics



Hello Nick74,
and thanks for your response.
Interesting obvservations.
Not having heard the latest dCS makes it impossible for me to say more.
But I do like huge speakers setups in suitably  BIG rooms.

 Just fresh out of this morning's Yoga Nidra in 16/44.1 quality I can say that  I feel good.

And although it should not really have  been part of my Yoga Nidra experience as such, I could not help thinking a couple of times, " wow the instructor's voice  sounds very realistic and naturally warm as it did live when I learnt this from him".
Not the usual 16 bit digital hardness and artifacts,I have always been hearing before, but naturally warm.
And the same applies to most of the 16/44.1 music  albums I  can now listen to with much more satisfaction than before.
One very clear step closer to the real thing imo.
"To m-scale or not to m-scale" is not really a question for me any longer. Es muss sein.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## maxh22

Christer said:


> Hello Nick74,
> and thanks for your response.
> Interesting obvservations.
> Not having heard the latest dCS makes it impossible for me to say more.
> ...



So Christer, do you feel the Qutest M Scaled now equals or exceeds the musicality of Vinyl that you were accustomed to before?


----------



## tgipier

I been debating on going for a qutest or waiting for a bit longer so I can snipe a good deal on a DAVE. It really comes out how well the DAVE looks and how absolutely everyone loves it and thinks it literally the best dac on the market. Kinda debating on Qutest plus HMS vs DAVE right now. Ofcourse... DAVE with HMS is true end game.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> @Zzt231gr I m powering the Qutest from the Pilot 2 right now. I ve listened to it with the stock ps for about an hour first and now for the last 20 mins I have switched to the Pilot 2. Sitting here wondering why I didn't do it all this time...Take what I ll say with a pinch of salt as this today could be a particularly good eve in terms of mains quality anyway. I find the sound of the Pilot quite different. It almost feels like I ve changed the driver tube on my amp! The mids are more present and holographic, more liquid and textured. I wanna say brighter but  in a good way , there s no sibilance. I do wonder how it will sound in an SS set up though  as for my voluptious sounding valve amplifiers some of the lower mids sound a bit more contained- which is not bad as that part of the spectrum had a bit extra ''padding''-. Initial impressions all these but I will experiement further.


So,it is not the fatiguing brightness,right?Sounds more natural?



dac64 said:


> I stick to the stock power supply.


The reason?


----------



## Nik74

Zzt231gr said:


> So,it is not the fatiguing brightness,right?Sounds more natural?



I am very sensitive to brightness and can safely say not fatiguing. I stayed up listening to music later than I should cause I enjoying it so much. A lot of classical sounded more natural and vivid to my ears. After 4 hours I switched off only cause I had to sleep. 

Conversely on Tuesday night I switched from optical to usb to hear some 24/96 hi res stuff from Qobuz - because my chrome cast suffers drop outs with hi res from Qobuz which is very annoying - and I couldn’t handle the sound! It was exactly that fatiguing brightness that adds detail but irritated me within 10 mins. So much that I opted for streaming at 16/44 to use the optical connection. Mentioning this to give you en example of how much I avoid brightness. 

Back to the Pilot , I ll need to experiment more but as a first encounter I think it was a great buy


----------



## Zzt231gr (Dec 20, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> I am very sensitive to brightness and can safely say not fatiguing. I stayed up listening to music later than I should cause I enjoying it so much. A lot of classical sounded more natural and vivid to my ears. After 4 hours I switched off only cause I had to sleep.
> 
> Conversely on Tuesday night I switched from optical to usb to hear some 24/96 hi res stuff from Qobuz - because my chrome cast suffers drop outs with hi res from Qobuz which is very annoying - and I couldn’t handle the sound! It was exactly that fatiguing brightness that adds detail but irritated me within 10 mins. So much that I opted for streaming at 16/44 to use the optical connection. Mentioning this to give you en example of how much I avoid brightness.
> 
> Back to the Pilot , I ll need to experiment more but as a first encounter I think it was a great buy


I am eagerly waiting for more news!Can you power Qutest while charging?Duration time?


----------



## Nik74

Another thing to note is that in the time I used it for the charge went from 98% to 89%, not bad for nearly 4 hours


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> So,it is not the fatiguing brightness,right?Sounds more natural?
> 
> The reason?



I want to leave the qutest always on, with means I  have to replace the power add every 18 months.

I can live with the stock, not a day and night on my system.

Btw, every hour will consume ~4% battery power.


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> I want to leave the qutest always on, with means I  have to replace the power add every 18 months.
> 
> I can live with the stock, not a day and night on my system.
> 
> Btw, every hour will consume ~4% battery power.


You mean it plays music 24/7?


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> You mean it plays music 24/7?



leave the qutest on for 24/7.


----------



## GreenBow

Nik74 said:


> I am very sensitive to brightness and can safely say not fatiguing. I stayed up listening to music later than I should cause I enjoying it so much. A lot of classical sounded more natural and vivid to my ears. After 4 hours I switched off only cause I had to sleep.
> 
> Conversely on Tuesday night I switched from optical to usb to hear some 24/96 hi res stuff from Qobuz - because my chrome cast suffers drop outs with hi res from Qobuz which is very annoying - and I couldn’t handle the sound! It was exactly that fatiguing brightness that adds detail but irritated me within 10 mins. So much that I opted for streaming at 16/44 to use the optical connection. Mentioning this to give you en example of how much I avoid brightness.
> 
> Back to the Pilot , I ll need to experiment more but as a first encounter I think it was a great buy



If you get brightness on USB, maybe try the Audioquest Jitterbug. I did with Mojo, when connected to noisy PC. It warmed it up, made it smoother, and seemed to reduce soundstage. Thought to myself 'really'. (I had read others experienced the same, and they took the Jitterbug off.)  Then thought OK, just give it time, and re-adjust. Never looked back. Matched optical performance.

Hugo 2 apparently has RFI filtering on USB in. Some others and myself, say they can't hear any difference between optical and USB. I would actually have thought Qutest the same. Must be. Maybe it was just Qobuz performance. They say you can hear differences in quality between online streamer.

Anyway totally lost in what I am saying here, because I never knew what you meant. Or why sound was bad. Therefor I will do the honourable thing and cease to rattle on, haha.


----------



## Chester Rockwell

Zzt231gr said:


> I am eagerly waiting for more news!Can you power Qutest while charging?Duration time?



As I said on PM Zzt231gr, you shouldn’t expect a battery pack to radically alter the sound of the Qutest otherwise you will only be setting yourself up for disappointment. As Nik74 attests, the Pilot power pack is a great device generally, but is not doing anything special in terms of the Quest.

It’s providing power like any other power pack. And unless you have noisy components in your chain or have noisy mains, you may notice no difference. I’d hate for you to waste money thinking it was a game changer. I and others have only reported our experiences. Yours may be completely different.


----------



## Andyb90

Would either of these headphone amps be a good match for the Qutest? 
Cayin iHA-6
Lehmann Audio Linear


----------



## Christer (Dec 21, 2018)

maxh22 said:


> So Christer, do you feel the Qutest M Scaled now equals or exceeds the musicality of vinyl?
> 
> Hi max22,
> Interesting question.
> ...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Chester Rockwell said:


> As I said on PM Zzt231gr, you shouldn’t expect a battery pack to radically alter the sound of the Qutest otherwise you will only be setting yourself up for disappointment. As Nik74 attests, the Pilot power pack is a great device generally, but is not doing anything special in terms of the Quest.
> 
> It’s providing power like any other power pack. And unless you have noisy components in your chain or have noisy mains, you may notice no difference. I’d hate for you to waste money thinking it was a game changer. I and others have only reported our experiences. Yours may be completely different.


Your post is very valuable!Thank you.


----------



## dac64

From Christer 

Hi max22,
Interesting question.
Well, to make things absolutely clear, my absolute refererence is how acoustic music actually sounds LIVE, and NOT as it sounds via even very good vinyl like direct cuts.
Vinyl is far from perfect.
And I will need to compare back home with an MScaler in my own home system via my electrostatic speakers to hear how M Scaler works in my system to answer your question.
But I suspect M Scaler could very well be, as Rob put it, "the final nail in the coffin of vinyl" for me too.
I am now much to my surprise discovering what has hitherto been hidden in well recorded 16/44.1 via all other way of playing rbcd I have heard and they are many.

Qutest on its own did not sound quite as realistic as the best direct cuts can do to me via my speakers.

But I can as before, safely say, that as far as the actual SQ leap and increase in realism is concerned with full m-scaling via my current travel setup consisting of my Qutest an M Scaler and a battery powered headphone amp connected via the best of two sets of rca cables I have with me, and into my HD 800,has taken my enjoyment of well made digital recordings in general and 16/44.1 in particular to new higher levels.

Levels I now realize I was not even close to with Qutest on its own.

It is almost as if the harshness and hardening and the colouration of both tonal and timbral information and general lack of resolution digital so often suffers from, has been "vacuum cleaned" away with my best recordings.
And acoustic space and soundstage is much more real with longer decay on recordings where that has been properly captured too.

Qutest on its own was definitely a clear improvement on HUGO 1 which I also have at hand, but would not even dream of using other than in an absolute emergency from now on.

And the increase in SQ is so big with M Scaler at full 1M mscaling that Qutest also lags far behind imho.
There is no going back.

Ps Sorry if the above takes away from some of the joy new Qutest owners may feel.
But I have to say again if you havent heard your well recorded acoustic music m-scaled "You aint heard nothing yet", imho.

Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## maxh22

Great post, thanks Christer 

I’m glad you found something that seems to have finally satisfied you.


----------



## HumanMedia

peter1480 said:


> https://www.teddypardo.com/powersupplies/usb-psus/teddyusb.html based in Israel and very good.



I’ve tried 5 linear supplies on Qutest and 2Qute and whilst the Pardo is great for other components it has a bad synergy with the Chords in my system.
Best is the UpTone JS2 (albeit at over twice the price). A lowier priced supply which sounds good with the Chords is the Sbooster Best of both worlds supply.


----------



## Nik74

Further to the discussion of alternative power supplies and powerbanks, this evening I m trying something new. I have the feeling from reading others posts that maybe it is not the power supplied to the Qutest that makes a difference when I use the Pilot powerbank but rather the fact that there is one less switching power supply polluting my mains with noise... So I removed the switching supply of the chromecast from my PS Audio Dectet and connected it to a different outlet under the logic that since I m using optical out of the chromecast, any electrically transmitted artifacts and noise from the unfiltered mains won't find their way into the DAC. So now the only thing in my audio chain connected to the Dectet are my valve amp combo. Is there sense in me doing all this or am I now combining my lack of technical understanding  with audio nervosa? 
I m hearing more timbral variation and harmonic richness but it could totally be placebo. I don't know anymore !


----------



## dac64 (Dec 21, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> Further to the discussion of alternative power supplies and powerbanks, this evening I m trying something new. I have the feeling from reading others posts that maybe it is not the power supplied to the Qutest that makes a difference when I use the Pilot powerbank but rather the fact that there is one less switching power supply polluting my mains with noise... So I removed the switching supply of the chromecast from my PS Audio Dectet and connected it to a different outlet under the logic that since I m using optical out of the chromecast, any electrically transmitted artifacts and noise from the unfiltered mains won't find their way into the DAC. So now the only thing in my audio chain connected to the Dectet are my valve amp combo. Is there sense in me doing all this or am I now combining my lack of technical understanding  with audio nervosa?
> I m hearing more timbral variation and harmonic richness but it could totally be placebo. I don't know anymore !



My system is simple, a sony hap-z1es (analogue transformer was disconnected therefore only digital circuitry is active) USB to qutest.


----------



## Christer (Dec 22, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> Further to the discussion of alternative power supplies and powerbanks, this evening I m trying something new. I have the feeling from reading others posts that maybe it is not the power supplied to the Qutest that makes a difference when I use the Pilot powerbank but rather the fact that there is one less switching power supply polluting my mains with noise... So I removed the switching supply of the chromecast from my PS Audio Dectet and connected it to a different outlet under the logic that since I m using optical out of the chromecast, any electrically transmitted artifacts and noise from the unfiltered mains won't find their way into the DAC. So now the only thing in my audio chain connected to the Dectet are my valve amp combo. Is there sense in me doing all this or am I now combining my lack of technical understanding  with audio nervosa?
> I m hearing more timbral variation and harmonic richness but it could totally be placebo. I don't know anymore !



Hello again Nik 74,
well I for one don't think you are hearing  only a placebo effect when you say you hear more timbral variation and harmonic richness off the grid.
Since buying my Qutest I had been using it with the supplied power unit,but when auditioning M Scaler with my Qutest one dealer had a linear battery powered unit called:
*Musical Paradise MP-U1 USB Linear Power Supply* which to my surprise seemed to clean up things a bit compared to using  the supplied power unit plugged into the wall socket. Even under their imho too noisy
HI FI shop  conditions I could hear a small difference.
I have now been using that unit together with Qutest and M Scaler with its supplied power plug for about a week and charged the battery unit for Qutest over night.
But last night in the middle of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring I ran out of battery power and had to plug in the supplied power unit from Chord to carry on my listening and could actually under very quiet  late night conditions hear that some of the effortless natural almost completely noise free delivery from 16/44.1 I was hearing before was not quite there any longer. It simply did not sound as clean and enjoyable as before any longer.
String sound suffered most.
Having compared the two I must say that I very much doubt I am imagining things.
No placebo involved imho.
It could  of course still partly be because wallpower here in Malaysia is not very clean that I like the battery unit better. But there is no doubt in my mind that battery powered via this unit my music sounds more relaxed and cleaner than without it.
And as noted before with one of my  quite low res Yoga Nidra tracks there is also less sibilance on a female instructor's voice via the battery unit, than via the  supplied unit from Chord.
I think HIFI News who were the first to mention this  possible problem with the supplied unit,were correct in their review of Qutest.
Maybe only some supplied power units are sending noise back into the dac via the mains,but mine does.

Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> Further to the discussion of alternative power supplies and powerbanks, this evening I m trying something new. I have the feeling from reading others posts that maybe it is not the power supplied to the Qutest that makes a difference when I use the Pilot powerbank but rather the fact that there is one less switching power supply polluting my mains with noise... So I removed the switching supply of the chromecast from my PS Audio Dectet and connected it to a different outlet under the logic that since I m using optical out of the chromecast, any electrically transmitted artifacts and noise from the unfiltered mains won't find their way into the DAC. So now the only thing in my audio chain connected to the Dectet are my valve amp combo. Is there sense in me doing all this or am I now combining my lack of technical understanding  with audio nervosa?
> I m hearing more timbral variation and harmonic richness but it could totally be placebo. I don't know anymore !


Is Dectet a mains filter?If it is,you are probably right!



Christer said:


> Hello again Nik 74,
> well I for one don't think you are hearing  only a placebo effect when you say you hear more timbral variation and harmonic richness off the grid.
> Since buying my Qutest I had been using it with the supplied power unit,but when auditioning M Scaler with my Qutest one dealer had a linear battery powered unit called:
> *Musical Paradise MP-U1 USB Linear Power Supply* which to my surprise seemed to clean up things a bit compared to using  the supplied power unit plugged into the wall socket. Even under their imho too noisy
> ...


That PSU seems interesting!Have you compared it to the mentioned powerbank?


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> when auditioning M Scaler with my Qutest one dealer had a linear battery powered unit called: Musical Paradise MP-U1 USB Linear Power Supply which to my surprise seemed to clean up things a bit compared to using the supplied power unit plugged into the wall socket. Even under their imho too noisy
> HI FI shop conditions I could hear a small difference.
> I have now been using that unit together with Qutest and M Scaler with its supplied power plug for about a week and charged the battery unit for Qutest over night.
> But last night in the middle of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring I ran out of battery power and had to plug in the supplied power unit from Chord to carry on my listening and could actually under very quiet late night conditions *hear that some of the effortless natural almost completely noise free delivery from 16/44.1 I was hearing before was not quite there any longer*.



Can you elaborate on what you mean by the noise free delivery not being there any more. Could you hear some noise with the stock supply?



Christer said:


> I think HIFI News who were the first to mention this  possible problem with the supplied unit,were correct in their review of Qutest.
> Maybe only some supplied power units are sending noise back into the dac via the mains,but mine does.
> Cheers Controversial Christer



I have heard whispers of doubt about the conclusions of HiFi News on this matter so maybe take their conclusions with a pinch of salt.


----------



## Christer (Dec 22, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Can you elaborate on what you mean by the noise free delivery not being there any more. Could you hear some noise with the stock supply?
> 
> 
> 
> I have heard whispers of doubt about the conclusions of HiFi News on this matter so maybe take their conclusions with a pinch of salt.



Hi Triode User,
I am relying on my own ears and repeated comparisons in my observations.My quoting HI FI News was only because they mentioned similar observations in their review of Qutest.
I don't really need HIFI Mags to tell me what sounds better.

Please read my post above again where I mentioned some differences I can hear between on or off grid connection of Qutest.
I am not stating that it is the power unit as such that makes a difference, but I know what I hear.
If it helps RF interference through the mains,might be what is causing the differences?
As someone having had big problems with HUGO and RF or whatever contaminations there might  have been that sometimes made it absolutely unlistenable in my home system,I am not imagining things.
But while I am observing things. Both good and bad.
Let me also mention that in spite of my recent very high praise of M Scaler with Qutest the usb cables supplied with both are of inferior quality imho.
The one supplied with M Scaler sometimes completely lost connection with my computer so I have used a better one since four days.
I started using the supplied one because it was much longer than the one I normally use and I needed that in my hotel room.
The first time it happened I was very worried and first thought, is M Scaler already malfunctioning after less than a week of using it?

It happened three times in a row within  five minutes and then I switched to the cable I normally use with Qutest on its own and since then I have had no such problems with the  usb connection to my laptop.

That cable is NOT the one supplied with Qutest by the way.
That was also a flimsy one.

I could even feel by touching it that the fitting was not good with the M Scaler supplied usb cable into my laptop.
Very loose and not the tight fit I am used to with a good USB cable.
I would not be surprised if sturdier BNC cables with tighter connections would as Rob put it could make things "a tad smoother" either.
I also know that a limiting factor so far,could also be Qutest having quite extensively auditioned both DAVE/BLU2 and TT2/M Scaler.
But what I have now while travelling is simply soo much better than Qutest on its own also using Chord's supplied power unit!
But I also know quite well, what is smoother and more realistic sound when I hear it.

I will eventually experiment with both other BNC cables than the ones supplied by Chord and maybe also try M Scaler off the grid if I can get hold of the Power Add Pilot Pro 2.
I also have my reference rca cables from another company by the name Chord back home. I did not bring those for my travels. And the difference between for example the Chord Company Clearway rca cables that I bought just to be able to use Qutest when I bought it and the better Audioquest  rca cable I also  have with me, are clearly audible to me even via my HD 800.Smoother,more realistic.

Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Christer

Zzt231gr said:


> Is Dectet a mains filter?If it is,you are probably right!
> 
> That PSU seems interesting!Have you compared it to the mentioned powerbank?



 No I haven't tried any power banks at all .I am still confused which one to try.
 I would like to get the Power Add Pilot Pro 2. But it seems unavailable  here in Asia.
I would have bought one already if I could have bought one off the shelf somewhere.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Nik74

@Zzt231gr The PS Audio Dectet is a very decent mains filter/ power centre, entry level but in my system very effective. MAins quality in London is not optimal and I live in rented accomodation so I don't have a dedicated power circuit for my audio needs so as you can imagine the difference with this is significant, plus it offers protection from power surges and the like.


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> Hi Triode User,
> I am relying on my own ears and repeated comparisons in my observations.My quoting HI FI News was only because they mentioned similar observations in their review of Qutest.
> I don't really need HIFI Mags to tell me what sounds better.
> 
> ...



Thanks, I was not doubting you, just wanted to draw out what differences you heard because others read this forum and get to form opinions based on what is said.

"I_ would not be surprised if sturdier BNC cables with tighter connections would as Rob put it could make things "a tad smoother" either._" I don't think that was what he was talking about with his 'tad smother' comment.


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Thanks, I was not doubting you, just wanted to draw out what differences you heard because others read this forum and get to form opinions based on what is said.
> 
> "I_ would not be surprised if sturdier BNC cables with tighter connections would as Rob put it could make things "a tad smoother" either._" I don't think that was what he was talking about with his 'tad smother' comment.


As far as personal comments go they can be useful sometimes but the best thing is always to listen yourself imho. 
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> As far as personal comments go they can be useful sometimes but the best thing is always to listen yourself imho.
> Cheers Controversial Christer



Agreed, listen for yourself. There is only one person to please that way!


----------



## Don Quichotte

Christer said:


> I also have my reference rca cables from another company by the name Chord back home. I did not bring those for my travels. And the difference between for example the Chord Company Clearway rca cables that I bought just to be able to use Qutest when I bought it and the better Audioquest  rca cable I also  have with me, are clearly audible to me even via my HD 800.Smoother,more realistic.


Which ones are better, the Chord or the Audioquest?


----------



## maxh22

Christer said:


> No I haven't tried any power banks at all .I am still confused which one to try.
> I would like to get the Power Add Pilot Pro 2. But it seems unavailable  here in Asia.
> I would have bought one already if I could have bought one off the shelf somewhere.
> Cheers Controversial Christer



Hello Christer and others, from experience I have found that not all power banks sound the same, some sound more smooth and rich than others. After trying half a dozen I had at hand I would like to recommend my favorite so far.

https://www.amazon.com/Heloideo-100...ne+Lightning+Cable,+Micro+USB+Cable+and+USB+C

The closest thing I have to a Pilot Pro 2 is a Cectdigi  Laptop Power Bank but sadly I found it inferior to the power bank I linked above, it sounds much brighter in comparison but with overly warm gear it might be a good match...


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Christer said:


> And the difference between for example the Chord Company Clearway rca cables that I bought just to be able to use Qutest when I bought it and the better Audioquest  rca cable I also  have with me, are clearly audible to me even via my HD 800.Smoother,more realistic.


You have Chord Clearway Analogue RCA, like this one, reviewed by What Hi-Fi? And what type of Audioquest? I have Audioquest Golden Gate RCA. After reading this review, was thinking to give Chord Clearway a try. But maybe it would be better just to buy a higher line of Audioquest RCAs.


----------



## Christer (Dec 23, 2018)

Don Quichotte said:


> Which ones are better, the Chord or the Audioquest?



The Audioquest Colorado.

I don't think it is available any longer. HIFI companies keep changing names of things to entice buyers to buy the newer not necessarily reallly better or different sounding stuff all the time.

But it was one of Audioquest's better rca cables when I bought it.
Weird name for a cable that is not very coloured at all.

I guess they did not even think of what Colorado actually means when they named it?
The guys at Audioquest were probably only thinking of that beautiful state in the USA when they named it.

But I also have a Chord Signature back home.
One of  their reference cables  which is even better and more resolving than the Audioquest Colorado.
I did not want to bring such an expensive cable on my travels.

The cheap Chord Clearway is ok for its price. But if you listen to  well recorded acoustic music you might/should? be able to hear improvements with better rca cables provided your system is resolving enough.

In the test in the HI FI mag quoted in the other post they mentioned synths sounding better with Clearway than the other cable they used.
Personally I NEVER listen to synths  and electronica. Besides, those genres have no actual references points in HI FI terms anyway so  whatever tests like that one say I would not put much trust in them.

One of the most amusing things I have seen here recently was the video Triode User posted  in  the M Scaler thread I believe?of Rob demoing the M Scaler somewhere where he was asked by one person how M Scaler would sound with live band and  amplified music since many probably listen to that type of music?

I very much enjoyed Rob's honesty in his response to the question asked.

He basically said amplified band music generally sounds flat and "awful or dreadful" and apart from  clearer  starting and stopping of notes you could not expect M Scaler to perform any other kind of miracle than this with those genres.
I could not agree more!
Spot on imho!

Rob's response  reminded me of the first time I heard the new M Scaler/TT2 without any music of my own with me and with  something by AC/DC playing via LCD4 headphones.
It sounded absolutely dreadful to me.
I still honestly don't understand why  people who listen to that type of music ever bother to buy anything ,more expensive than a smartphone and a pair of IEMs?
What is there really to gain?

But M Scaler and suitable quality equipment to support it, and well recorded acoustic music now that can be quite something imo.

But everything matters. Cables, connections ,analogue parts, power supplies speakers and headphones  each and all in one way or other influence the final sound.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Christer

maxh22 said:


> Hello Christer and others, from experience I have found that not all power banks sound the same, some sound more smooth and rich than others. After trying half a dozen I had at hand I would like to recommend my favorite so far.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Heloideo-10000mAh-Portable-External-Cellphone（Black）/dp/B07GZP75XD/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1545511660&sr=8-2-fkmr1&keywords=10000mAh+All+in+One+Power+Bank+with+Built-in+AC+Wall+Plug+Prong,+Built-in+iPhone+Lightning+Cable,+Micro+USB+Cable+and+USB+C
> 
> The closest thing I have to a Pilot Pro 2 is a Cectdigi  Laptop Power Bank but sadly I found it inferior to the power bank I linked above, it sounds much brighter in comparison but with overly warm gear it might be a good match...



Thanks for your input and thoughts.
I have no experience at all with any powerbanks. 
But reading the possibly hyped and for marketing purposes written things said online relating to powerbanks in comparison with linear power supplies like the one I just bought for my Qutest it may be that most powerbanks can not really improve on supplied power units  for technical reasons I don't quite understand.

But the possible  only hyped "tech talk" for the MPU1 claims to bring better USB isolation than most powerbanks which according to them do the same thing as all switching power units anyway.

 And that in itself is according to them a problem they have solved by going linear and using a battery to avoid any possible mains pollution to reach the dac.

I leave this discussion to those who understand the "tech talk" better than I do.

But the MPU1 I am currently using with Qutest/M Scaler makes my music sound more relaxed and cleaner than the supplied power unit does . 
That is something I can actually confirm simply by comparing the two with the same tracks.

And it is also my experience that if things sound bright in digital that is most often a distortion.  
Not an improvement in SQ.
Live acoustic music never sounds as overbright as most digital has a tendency to make it sound.

One of several  advantages of M Scaler is that it tamed/removed, cleaned up, overbrightness and sibilance on female voices.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## SoundeScapes

Christer said:


> I still honestly don't understand why  people who listen to that type of music ever bother to buy anything ,more expensive than a smartphone and a pair of IEMs?
> What is there really to gain?



Hi Christer,

I must say I find that kind of statement a bit odd and somewhat closeminded.
Not trying to be rude or anything but I really don't understand your view on that.

I listen to a lot of different music. Classical, more chamber / violin + piano than large scale orchestral though, jazz, folk etc.
But I grew up listening to rock / hard rock and I still like a lot of it today and listen to modern rock / hard rock occasionally too.

In my opinion all sounds that are to be converted from digital to analogue benefits from a good system.
It's, as you know, about getting the scale of the music right. Digging out as much details as possible
while presenting it in a natural non-fatiguing way.

So all the things you normally do to improve a system: chosing good equipment, finding the right cables, speaker positioning,
acoustical treatment etc really improves my listening experience for all kinds of music.
If it didn't something would be wrong IMO.

Unlike you the better my system gets the more I start to listen to new music. Even music that I have not really cared for before.
The reason I think is that the intention of the artist becomes more obvious, it is more present and emotional
and therefore easier to understand and appreciate.
Adding an M-Scaler I might even be able to listen to rap. Unlikely but not impossible 

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to everyone!


----------



## Don Quichotte

Thanks, Christer!


----------



## OG10

So the AD who I returned the Qutest is saying everything is fine.. I wish I had recorded the sound output before sending it onto them. So annoyed no one knows what the issue is


----------



## Zzt231gr

OG10 said:


> So the AD who I returned the Qutest is saying everything is fine.. I wish I had recorded the sound output before sending it onto them. So annoyed no one knows what the issue is


Can you please repost your problem?


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> Can you please repost your problem?


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-173#post-14662102


----------



## GreenBow

Nothing wrong with a bit of AC/DC.

I have many times listened to AC/DC tracks from Youtube, firstly with Mojo then Hugo 2. I have saved a few tracks into a folder I called Youtunes, so I can find them fast again.

My only problem with AC/DC is that there is no greatest hits album. I am not a fan so far of their general album music. Their hits though are excellent. All the better for a Chord DAC of course, and why I ended up saving them. (Maybe if I try their general album music more, I might grow to like them. Sometimes music takes a few listens.)


----------



## Mrandrade

[QUOTE = "Nik74, postagem: 14667761, membro: 493958"] [USUÁRIO = 495778] @ Zzt231gr [/ USER] Estou alimentando o Qutest do Pilot 2 agora. Você tem o estoque de imagens do primeiro e da agora, nos últimos 20 minutos, mudei para o piloto 2. Sentado, me perguntando por que eu não fiz isso todo esse tempo ... pitada de sal como esta hoje poderia ser uma boa noite em termos de qualidade de rede de qualquer maneira. Eu acho o som do piloto bem diferente. Parece que mudei o tubo do driver não meu amplificador! Os médios são mais presentes e holográficos, mais líquidos e texturizados. Você é tão brilhante, mas de bom humor, não há sibilância. Eu me pergunto como vai subir em uma configuração SS, mas como eles são voluptivos amplificadores de válvulas sonoras, Alguns dos métoos inferiores soam um pouco mais contidos, o que não é ruim, já que essa parte do espectro tinha um "preenchimento" extra -. Impressões iniciais, tudo isso, mas vou experimentar mais. [/
[QUOTE = "Nik74, post: 14667761, membro: 493958"] [USER = 495778] @ Zzt231gr [/ USER] Estou alimentando o Qutest do Pilot 2 agora. Eu escutei com o estoque ps por cerca de uma hora primeiro e agora, nos últimos 20 minutos, mudei para o piloto 2. Sentado aqui, me perguntando por que eu não fiz isso todo esse tempo ... Pegue o que vou dizer com uma pitada de sal como esta hoje poderia ser uma noite particularmente boa em termos de qualidade da rede de qualquer maneira. Eu acho o som do piloto bem diferente. Parece que mudei o tubo do driver no meu amplificador! Os médios são mais presentes e holográficos, mais líquidos e texturizados. Eu quero dizer mais brilhante, mas de um jeito bom, não há sibilância. Eu me pergunto como vai soar em uma configuração SS, mas como para os meus voluptivos amplificadores de válvulas sonoras, alguns dos médios inferiores soam um pouco mais contidos, o que não é ruim, já que essa parte do espectro tinha um "padding" extra -. Impressões iniciais, tudo isso, mas vou experimentar mais. [/ QUOTE]

Concordo consigo!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Zzt231gr said:


> Can you please repost your problem?


Tell them to keep it a few days and crash test it!


----------



## gasmonkey

Loving my Qutest streaming from Dell XPS 15 laptop. But would like to not have my laptop physically tied to the Qutest.

Looking for advice on integrating a network streamer with both Qutest and Roon. I have read through all 177 pages, and there has been some talk of Network Streamers, but not in the context of Roon.

Looking to be able to use Roon from my laptop (With music files stored locally on laptop ssd) and connected only via Wifi. Would also be cool to have a Network streamer with an SSD drive, but Im worried that would degrade the Roon experience as controlled from the laptop.

What is everyone using now?


----------



## Lodwales81

gasmonkey said:


> Loving my Qutest streaming from Dell XPS 15 laptop. But would like to not have my laptop physically tied to the Qutest.
> 
> Looking for advice on integrating a network streamer with both Qutest and Roon. I have read through all 177 pages, and there has been some talk of Network Streamers, but not in the context of Roon.
> 
> ...





gasmonkey said:


> Loving my Qutest streaming from Dell XPS 15 laptop. But would like to not have my laptop physically tied to the Qutest.
> 
> Looking for advice on integrating a network streamer with both Qutest and Roon. I have read through all 177 pages, and there has been some talk of Network Streamers, but not in the context of Roon.
> 
> ...


I'm using a sotm sms-200 which works perfectly with roon but you will still need a pc to run roon, I use quobuz and bubble upbp which does not require a pc.


----------



## dac64

OG10 said:


> So the AD who I returned the Qutest is saying everything is fine.. I wish I had recorded the sound output before sending it onto them. So annoyed no one knows what the issue is



Do you ask for replacement or refund?


----------



## gasmonkey

Lodwales81 said:


> I'm using a sotm sms-200 which works perfectly with roon but you will still need a pc to run roon, I use quobuz and bubble upbp which does not require a pc.



That's close, but doesn't quiet do what I am looking for. I am looking to Physically disconnect my PC, which means I need a network streamer that is good enough to act like a Chord Poly (but work) and connect to the Wifi upstairs (that my PC is also connected to) that I dont have access too.

It may be a dream... I guess I'm just happy to be rid of my Poly and if I have to use a 3m USB to my computer, so be it, but in the future I have an eye out for a good network streamer that can do it all and do it well for me.

I wont hijack this thread anymore as this is getting a bit off topic, but If anyone is using a Network Streamer that can do what Im looking for, please do post.


----------



## Rob Watts

Christer said:


> The Audioquest Colorado.
> 
> I don't think it is available any longer. HIFI companies keep changing names of things to entice buyers to buy the newer not necessarily reallly better or different sounding stuff all the time.
> 
> ...



Just to clarify my comments - when I said amplified band music sounds flat and "awful or dreadful" I was referring to live amplified music - reproducing the same music via a high end audio system sounds much better than a live performance - the only benefit of live with *amplified* music being the perception of starting and stopping of notes.

When you listen to good rock or electronica the ability to perceive soundstage (particularly depth) is enormous; some recordings have huge sense of soundstage; and using the M scaler will dramatically enhance the experience, particularly in the ability to get emotionally involved with the music. You have twisted my comments to attacking particular music genres, and that's something I strongly disagree with. I have lots of prog rock and electronica on my current playlist, and absolutely love that kind of music; together with all forms of classical music. I do not know of any music that will not benefit hugely with an M scaler, or a better DAC/amp.

Christer - please show some tolerance to other people's musical preferences. Just because you (or anybody else) do not like a particular form of music, does not mean that music is without merit.


----------



## Triode User

gasmonkey said:


> Loving my Qutest streaming from Dell XPS 15 laptop. But would like to not have my laptop physically tied to the Qutest.
> 
> Looking for advice on integrating a network streamer with both Qutest and Roon. I have read through all 177 pages, and there has been some talk of Network Streamers, but not in the context of Roon.
> 
> ...



I am using Roon on my Innuos server. Additionally I am using the beta option which streams from the RAM. I am hoping that the promised integration of Qobuz and Roon happens so I can stream from Qobuz within Roon.


----------



## Christer (Dec 24, 2018)

Rob Watts said:


> Just to clarify my comments - when I said amplified band music sounds flat and "awful or dreadful" I was referring to live amplified music - reproducing the same music via a high end audio system sounds much better than a live performance - the only benefit of live with *amplified* music being the perception of starting and stopping of notes.
> 
> When you listen to good rock or electronica the ability to perceive soundstage (particularly depth) is enormous; some recordings have huge sense of soundstage; and using the M scaler will dramatically enhance the experience, particularly in the ability to get emotionally involved with the music. You have twisted my comments to attacking particular music genres, and that's something I strongly disagree with. I have lots of prog rock and electronica on my current playlist, and absolutely love that kind of music; together with all forms of classical music. I do not know of any music that will not benefit hugely with an M scaler, or a better DAC/amp.
> 
> Christer - please show some tolerance to other people's musical preferences. Just because you (or anybody else) do not like a particular form of music, does not mean that music is without merit.



Hello Rob , mea culpa if that is how you interpreted my post. Don't worry. "Beauty is  as always ,in the eye of the beholder" I am fully aware of that.
But as I obviously misunderstood your comments in the video, I think you also misunderstood my reasons for commenting in such a rude manner again.
My comment was not really only related as such to the musical merits of AC/DC which was what I had fresh in mind although I personally have difficulty finding them.

I know a lot of people love music I absolutely abhor, like Rap and Heavy Metal, Metallica and a lot else that to me is simply slightly organised noise.
And I still wonder how with all the very high levels probably in the range of 10-15 % or so, of inherent distortions in for example the AC/DC track I first heard via M Scaler, what significant benefits M Scaler or any other really low distortion  link  in a HI FI chain could possibly bring?

That is of course  a very personal opinion that will offend many here  and I could  easily have avoided doing so.

But  offensive as it may be,I still think there is a bit  more than  just "a grain of truth"  in purely factual  HI FI terms in what I said.
Cheers  and Merry Christmas Controversial Christer


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes - Merry Christmas and a happy New Year to everyone!


----------



## Chester Rockwell (Dec 24, 2018)

gasmonkey said:


> Loving my Qutest streaming from Dell XPS 15 laptop. But would like to not have my laptop physically tied to the Qutest.
> 
> Looking for advice on integrating a network streamer with both Qutest and Roon. I have read through all 177 pages, and there has been some talk of Network Streamers, but not in the context of Roon.
> 
> ...



Gasmonkey, have you considered the Auralic Aries Mini? I could have imagined this but doesn’t the most recent firmware upgrade support Roon endpoints? I have one by the way and it’s great, but I’m not a Roon user yet so I don’t always pay full attention in terms of Roon support. They appear on eBay for good prices quite often. Plus, they can house an SSD should you wish to go down that route.


----------



## GreenBow (Dec 24, 2018)

The latest edition of HiFi Choice, is their Stereo Stars edition, (or their 'best of'). The Qutest DAC takes an award or Editor's Choice, on page 62-63. It looks like they have included the whole review. If you want to catch that review, then edition 445 is what you want.

I am not sure if HiFi Coice have put their review online yet. However after some digging I found the PDF of their review linked by some other audio website.


----------



## BoogieWoogie

https://www.bluebirdmusic.com/edit/...ctronics/hfc_436_chord_qutest_reprint-low.pdf


----------



## dac64

GreenBow said:


> The latest edition of HiFi Choice, is their Stereo Stars edition, (or their 'best of'). The Qutest DAC takes an award or Editor's Choice, on page 62-63. It looks like they have included the whole review. If you want to catch that review, then edition 445 is what you want.
> 
> I am not sure if HiFi Coice have put their review online yet. However after some digging I found the PDF of their review linked by some other audio website.



google HiFi Choice Stereo Stars edition Qutest DAC


----------



## nephilim32

Merry Christmas all!! 

May all your ears be filled with joyful sonics through one of the very best DACS around.


----------



## Jon L

BoogieWoogie said:


> https://www.bluebirdmusic.com/edit/...ctronics/hfc_436_chord_qutest_reprint-low.pdf



Thanks for the link.  
"The Verdict" section describes the sound as "Beautifully etched, liquid sound," which I quite agree with.  I hate "digital" sounding DAC's and also hate "analogue" sounding DAC's, and Qutest somehow walks both aisles. 

What is curious to me is why Chord uses 50 Ohm BNC input jacks and not 75 Ohm BNC jacks.  I've noticed this trend in many audiophile digital gear and must wonder why..?  Technically, 75 Ohm connection is widely considered superior for digital signal transmission with least attenuation and capacitance. Moreover, most audiophile BNC cables do feature 75 Ohm BNC connectors, which creates signal reflections and loss when connected to mismatched 50 Ohm BNC jacks.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Jon L said:


> Thanks for the link.
> "The Verdict" section describes the sound as "Beautifully etched, liquid sound," which I quite agree with.  I hate "digital" sounding DAC's and also hate "analogue" sounding DAC's, and Qutest somehow walks both aisles.
> 
> What is curious to me is why Chord uses 50 Ohm BNC input jacks and not 75 Ohm BNC jacks.  I've noticed this trend in many audiophile digital gear and must wonder why..?  Technically, 75 Ohm connection is widely considered superior for digital signal transmission with least attenuation and capacitance. Moreover, most audiophile BNC cables do feature 75 Ohm BNC connectors, which creates signal reflections and loss when connected to mismatched 50 Ohm BNC jacks.


I am pretty sure it's 75Ω.

The weird thing about this review,is the point where it says that the stock PSU is optimized to work perfectly like 2qute;isn't 2qute always benefitted from aftermarket PSUs?


----------



## Jon L (Dec 25, 2018)

They are definitely 50 Ohm connectors.  Even Chord MScaler uses 50 Ohm BNC connectors.  So if I had Chord DAC and Mscaler, I would make sure I use 50 Ohm BNC cables with 50 Ohm connectors, not 75 Ohm cables, between them to avoid signal reflections.




75vs50Ohm by drjlo2, on Flickr




ChordQutestBack by drjlo2, on Flickr





MscalerBack by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## odessamarin

@Jon L 

You atre right.. intresting. Here is mine TT - 50, Bryston - 75.
Is there any way to identify/measure COAX cabel..is it 50 or 75..?


----------



## Zzt231gr (Dec 30, 2018)

Jon L said:


> They are definitely 50 Ohm connectors.  Even Chord MScaler uses 50 Ohm BNC connectors.  So if I had Chord DAC and Mscaler, I would make sure I use 50 Ohm BNC cables with 50 Ohm connectors, not 75 Ohm cables, between them to avoid signal reflections.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then why does my Canare 75Ω plug fits?


----------



## Northern Light

Merry Christmas everyone!

I wondered whether the USB or S/PDIF input of the Qutest allowed the best sound quality — any wisdom here? 

Many thanks!!

N


----------



## Christer (Dec 26, 2018)

Zzt231gr said:


> I am pretty sure it's 75Ω.
> 
> The weird thing about this review,is the point where it says that the stock PSU is optimized to work perfectly like 2qute;isn't 2qute always benefitted from aftermarket PSUs?



I have  been using a battery powered linear PSU with Qutest and with M scaler in the chain as well for more than a week now.
I have to say once again,that to me and my ears and with full dynamic range classical hi res tracks in particular, like the ones from BIS where there can sometimes be such low level ppp- pppp sections in the music that are almost bordering on inaudible at times as in for example some of  Osmo Vänskä's Sibelius symphonies recordings for BIS,the noise floor and "grunge" for lack of a better word, is audibly lower with the battery pack than the supplied PSU for my Qutest.
With the supplied PSU it is more difficult to hear what is really going on musicallly in this almost verging on silence,borderline region.

And as far as digital and noise floor is concerned in general, I have yet to hear a completely quiet no hf zzzz at all, from any digital I have heard so far.
And if someone might think I prefer vinyl for that reason? Rest assured. NO I don't, it is even noisier than digital and rarely exceeds 55-60dB SNR.
But even with the battery powered PSU there is slight noise which is only audible with very low level music running.
At times I suspect it is inherent noise in the recording chain itself. And other times it seems to be connected with which PSU  I have connected.
My recent discoveries with wall powered switching PSU as the one supplied, and linear  battery powered as the one I am using, has made me interested in looking deeper into this.

There seems to be a lot of discussion around these things going on over at Computer Audiophile, where the owner of Uptone Audio has been posting things and mentioned that "all switching PSUs are sending noise back into the dac".
Correct me if I have misquoted him as I obviously misquoted Rob recently.
It is not my intention to misquote people at all.
But the subject of best possible PSU is now something I am interested in knowing more about, that is all I have to say on the subject for the time being.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## odessamarin

@Christer

What is your source USB or SPDIF?
Please try SPDIF.. you will be surprised  from your description, I see you a ready to hear the differance very well.
Let us know.

Merry Christmas everyone!


----------



## Christer

odessamarin said:


> @Christer
> 
> What is your source USB or SPDIF?
> Please try SPDIF.. you will be surprised  from your description, I see you a ready to hear the differance very well.
> ...



Hi ,
mbp via USB connection. 
I have tried optical with my cd players and Qutest on its own back home, but they both sounded different.
Via laptop I don't think you can do optical without compromises.
If that is what you mean with SPDIF?
I had a Hegel dac that I connected via SPDIF and an adapter to the USB port of my mbp a few years ago. But Qutest/M Scaler via USB and battery PSU is in a completely different league altogether.
Basically the only things I have heard outside of recording sessions and raw mic feed and sounding better are DAVE /BLU2  or  TT2 /M Scaler.
I have reasons to suspect M Scaler and the best  Chord dacs are  about as good as digital currently gets.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Arniesb

Christer said:


> Hi ,
> mbp via USB connection.
> I have tried optical with my cd players and Qutest on its own back home, but they both sounded different.
> Via laptop I don't think you can do optical without compromises.
> ...


Nah, Chord usb implementations is far from perfect. Not even Dave have anything close to perfect usb implementation...
Many audiophiles listen with mac so usb isnt that huge deal... 
You should take a look at Auralic Vega G2 now that is pefect usb implementation.


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> Nah, Chord usb implementations is far from perfect. Not even Dave have anything close to perfect usb implementation...
> Many audiophiles listen with mac so usb isnt that huge deal...
> You should take a look at Auralic Vega G2 now that is pefect usb implementation.



A few sweeping statements there tossed into the ether. Do your comments come from personal experience and what have you noticed about how the Vega G2 is different to the Dave?


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> A few sweeping statements there tossed into the ether. Do your comments come from personal experience and what have you noticed about how the Vega G2 is different to the Dave?


I tried great usb cables, and Ifi nano usb on 2qute... both largely improve sound. That is a reason why people dont like Chord amps. Very transparent yes, but if 1 would run cheap usb cables with no usb cleaner very transparent amp like Chord one will let you hear noise and other artifacts in its full glory.
Very few manufacturers have good usb implementations and they cost big money.


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> I tried great usb cables, and Ifi nano usb on 2qute... both largely improve sound. That is a reason why people dont like Chord amps. Very transparent yes, but if 1 would run cheap usb cables with no usb cleaner very transparent amp like Chord one will let you hear noise and other artifacts in its full glory.
> Very few manufacturers have good usb implementations and they cost big money.



That's the thing, you see, I have tried various (very) expensive USB cables with Chord Dave and found no difference at all compared to a simple good cable such as the Supra USB 2.0. And so I use the Supra.

And when you talk about the improvements that you hear, what are these exactly? What sort of noise do you hear coming through a Chord DAC?

I have not heard anything with my Dave to make me think other than that the USB in it is very well implemented although I admit now that I use the dual BNC into the Dave and my USB input is either into Blu2 or Hugo Mscaler.


----------



## odessamarin (Dec 26, 2018)

Christer said:


> Hi ,
> If that is what you mean with SPDIF?



I mean Coaxial digital interface. As said.. USB is far from perfect interface.. need to be implemented really well (good DDC USB to SPDIF alone cost 300$ and up ).
You can easily check it out, just stream the same track form your USB source and from coaxial/optical soururce (CD, DAP).. you will get what we mean right away.
USB will have this low level "noise" which really influence transparency, sound notes extention which drammatically effect scene depth presentation.. in this range where your brain will reconstruct space, you will get this low level grainy noise from USB that overlap this tiny spectrum.


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> That's the thing, you see, I have tried various (very) expensive USB cables with Chord Dave and found no difference at all compared to a simple good cable such as the Supra USB 2.0. And so I use the Supra.
> 
> And when you talk about the improvements that you hear, what are these exactly? What sort of noise do you hear coming through a Chord DAC?
> 
> I have not heard anything with my Dave to make me think other than that the USB in it is very well implemented although I admit now that I use the dual BNC into the Dave and my USB input is either into Blu2 or Hugo Mscaler.


Thats mystery. Even Audiobacon reviewer tried Dave with ton of usb cleanes, cables and all made difference. Besides do you know that dialetric needs breaking in to get signal integrity at full potential.


----------



## Triode User

odessamarin said:


> I mean Coaxial digital interface. As said.. USB is far from perfect interface.. need to be implemented really well (good DDC USB to SPDIF alone cost 300$ and up ).
> You can easily check it out, just stream the same track form your USB source and from coaxial/optical soururce (CD, DAP).. you will get what we mean right away.
> USB will have this low level "noise" which really influence transparency, sound notes extention which drammatically effect scene depth presentation.. in this range where your brain will reconstruct space, you will get this low level grainy noise from USB that overlap.



Who else hears this "low level grainy noise from USB" ? I do a lot of comparative listening on Dave with digital cables because of the ones that I make and I am completely familiar with easily hear the RF noise which although inaudible by itself can cause intermodulation distortion on an audio signal in the analogue stage and which in turn can give a sense of brightness or even harshness in the extreme. 

But I have never heard actual audible noise on a USB or any other digital input. 

I often hear the background noise fade in and fade out at the start and end of tracks on recordings, even recent ones, and often this is a very low level but is still audible so I would hope my hearing is good enough to hear the noise you hear. Can I have more pointers please about what to look out for this audible background noise?


----------



## odessamarin (Dec 26, 2018)

Triode User said:


> Can I have more pointers please about what to look out for this audible background noise?



As I say, it's not like a noise.. it more like harshness  (very low level) at very background. You should hear it with direct comparison of interconnected devices.
Take any CD, and flack of it.. play same track simultaneously trough CD (SPDIF) and USB/PC source. Do A/B.. switch your DAC inputs from one to other and back..
If your USB tract is compromised you will get it. Maybe it will be hard to describe exactly, But if you conclude that coaxial input give you more pleasure from music.. this is it. It will sound more clear and deep trough SPDIF... Just try.


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> Thats mystery. Even Audiobacon reviewer tried Dave with ton of usb cleanes, cables and all made difference. Besides do you know that dialetric needs breaking in to get signal integrity at full potential.



Yes and I respect Jay at AudioBacon but on the other hand different does not always mean better. I am obviously not a digital cable skeptic, quite the reverse in fact, all I am saying is that I personally have failed to hear differences between USB cables. I have also tried the JitterBug with the same result. 

But, ah, I have just remembered something to do with all this but I think I had better go to PM with you and @odessamarin about what I have just remembered if that is OK.


----------



## odessamarin

@Triode User 
.. sure


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> Yes and I respect Jay at AudioBacon but on the other hand different does not always mean better. I am obviously not a digital cable skeptic, quite the reverse in fact, all I am saying is that I personally have failed to hear differences between USB cables. I have also tried the JitterBug with the same result.
> 
> But, ah, I have just remembered something to do with all this but I think I had better go to PM with you and @odessamarin about what I have just remembered if that is OK.


ok.


----------



## Christer

Arniesb said:


> I tried great usb cables, and Ifi nano usb on 2qute... both largely improve sound. That is a reason why people dont like Chord amps. Very transparent yes, but if 1 would run cheap usb cables with no usb cleaner very transparent amp like Chord one will let you hear noise and other artifacts in its full glory.
> Very few manufacturers have good usb implementations and they cost big money.


Hmm, So your suggestion is to go for something less transparent in order to hide noise and artefacts?
There is  a contradiction in what you are saying, if so.
I want maximum transparency and resolution without any type of noise at all if possible.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Christer

Christer said:


> Hmm, So your suggestion is to go for something less transparent in order to hide noise and artefacts?
> There is  a contradiction in what you are saying, if so.
> I want maximum transparency and resolution without any type of noise or harshness at all if possible.
> And I can hear an improvement and lessening of noise and harshness,by using a battery powered  linear PSU instead of the supplied switching one with Qutest/ MScaler so maybe we are actually talking  about the same thing but differnt ways to solve the problem?
> ...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Qutest just reviewed on Stereophile!


----------



## Nik74

Zzt231gr said:


> Qutest just reviewed on Stereophile!



Is there a link ? I can’t find the review for some reason


----------



## plsvn

http://bfy.tw/LXL6


----------



## Zzt231gr (Dec 28, 2018)

https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-qu


Nik74 said:


> Is there a link ? I can’t find the review for some reason


A very positive one,too!But if I read correctly,Qutest was evaluated using USB input.


----------



## Nik74

plsvn said:


> http://bfy.tw/LXL6



Did you just call me lazy


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 29, 2018)

Jon L said:


> They are definitely 50 Ohm connectors.  Even Chord MScaler uses 50 Ohm BNC connectors.  So if I had Chord DAC and Mscaler, I would make sure I use 50 Ohm BNC cables with 50 Ohm connectors, not 75 Ohm cables, between them to avoid signal reflections.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



why is chord so silent in this thread, why can they not simply just answer such question, 50ohm or 75ohm, this frustrates me, I feel there is no interaction here at all from chord opposite other threads , as I was going to move to BNC now I have to guess what it is.

anyhow, I am a bit a newbie in connections, so how can `i connect my macbook pro to qutest using BNC and what is a good BNC cable that will not cost an arm and a leg

in addition i would like to know why there are 1v, 2v and 3v modes on qutest, at least explain why such options are available and what choosing any mode would do to sound , all i get is answers and speculations why does chord @Rob Watts not chime in and explain to us the marvel of this miracle mystery device, I paid big money for this and expect to at least get straight answers, otherwise I could have chosen a cheaper company from whom I do not expect any support or answers

manuals do not mention anything, so am I supposed to start a guessing game myself, some companies think we all were born with an engineering gene and that we are supposed to telepathically know what chord intended

sorry but i am frustrated as all I see is just people guessing things and giving their recs, why not get straight answers from chord

finally thanks for the manual that says nothing

finally for all those who say iso regen, from my experience, there was no improvement at all using it, heck the iso regen did literally nothing, and I have the best headphones ( he1000v2 and meze empyrean ) , so guys save your money from buying iso regen. Sorry but paid to get improvement and got nothing from adding few things that got recommended here,

my system is macbook pro 2018--qutest-ifi ican pro---- headphones . ( yes bought usb curious cable )


----------



## Nik74

It’s holiday season and everyone needs a break even Chord!


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 29, 2018)

Nik74 said:


> It’s holiday season and everyone needs a break even Chord!



yes you are right, so let's wait and see, i am hopeful to get straight answers whenever they have time.

but i like the guessing games to stop for such important info bout bnc ohm and to be answered by chord

i envy the rme adi-2 dac owners for the amazing manual, thanks zreview for  letting me get frustrated


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> why is chord so silent in this thread, why can they not simply just answer such question, 50ohm or 75ohm, this frustrates me, I feel there is no interaction here at all from chord opposite other threads , as I was going to move to BNC now I have to guess what it is.
> 
> anyhow, I am a bit a newbie in connections, so how can `i connect my macbook pro to qutest using BNC and what is a good BNC cable that will not cost an arm and a leg
> 
> ...


Curious have ground wire separated so any usb stuff will bring less difference. 2nd you have laptop and laptops is much less noisy than pc. Last thing how long did it take to evaluate iso regen? Did you just blind tested it and hoped for immediate huge difference?


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 29, 2018)

Arniesb said:


> Curious have ground wire separated so any usb stuff will bring less difference. 2nd you have laptop and laptops is much less noisy than pc. Last thing how long did it take to evaluate iso regen? Did you just blind tested it and hoped for immediate huge difference?



well for a week now i have been trying blind tests and non blind tests, nada zero effect on iso regen, also the switch on or off on iso regen did not do anything at all

well I have an alienware 15r3 and the same thing no effect on iso regen. I am not using a pc, so maybe pcs benefit from iso regen but on both alienware and macbook pro no effect at all

i am using audirvana as a player on both windows laptop and mac


----------



## Arniesb (Dec 29, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> well for a week now i have been trying blind tests and non blind tests, nada zero effect on iso regen, also the switch on or off on iso regen did not do anything at all
> 
> well I have an alienware 15r3 and the same thing no effect on iso regen. I am not using a pc, so maybe pcs benefit from iso regen but on both alienware and macbook pro no effect at all
> 
> i am using audirvana as a player on both windows laptop and mac


Honestly i think Curious just with separated line is doing all the work needed. My ifi nano usb clean noise when using cheaper usb cables, but when using Wireworld platinum7  which also have signal line separated it actually dont reduce anymore noise cause wireworld is already dead quiet.
Instead it adds authority, but reduce resolution significantly... probably all because copper usb cable goes 1st from source instead of my wireworld silver one.
Well thanks for your impressions i think week is more than enough to evaluate iso regen. You saved me the buy cause i was eyeing it too, cheers.


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 29, 2018)

Arniesb said:


> Honestly i think Curious just with separated line is doing all the work needed. My ifi nano usb clean noise when using cheaper usb cables, but when using Wireworld platinum7  which also have signal line separated it actually dont reduce anymore noise cause wireworld already dead quiet.
> Instead it adds authority, but reduce resolution significantly... probably all because copper usb cable goes 1st from source instead of my wireworld silver one.
> Well thanks for your impressions i think week is more than enough to evaluate iso regen. You saved me the buy cause i was eyeing it too, cheers.



i think your answer could be an explanation, with curious alone i hear a difference than using cheap usb cables but let me tell you this, its only a tiny fraction better than this usb cable, which is cheap but really worth it

https://www.aliexpress.com/store/pr...365d-4a59-a562-3da31ab2223c&priceBeautifyAB=0

the curious cable sounds bit more full and detailed, and sounds really good by itself

as for aucharm it sounds as well good but with more details in the highs which could be a bit too much for some recordings

aucharm and iso regen no effect as well


----------



## Triode User

Sound Eq said:


> why is chord so silent in this thread, why can they not simply just answer such question, 50ohm or 75ohm, this frustrates me, I feel there is no interaction here at all from chord opposite other threads , as I was going to move to BNC now I have to guess what it is.
> 
> anyhow, I am a bit a newbie in connections, so how can `i connect my macbook pro to qutest using BNC and what is a good BNC cable that will not cost an arm and a leg
> 
> ...



As has been said, this is the holiday season. Please do not get grumpy with people enjoying their holidays.

Some answers though (these are not guesses).

You cannot connect the Qutest to a MacBook Pro via BNC because the MacBook Pro does not have a suitable output. You can use USB though.

Quest has switchable output voltages to cater for different amplifiers with different input sensitivities. I suggest you start with the 1v and if that does not give you a viable volume range with your amplifier then go up to the 2v and if that is too quiet at all volume control positions then move on to the 3v. If you hear distortion with the higher outputs from the Qutest then you are getting clipping and you will need to go back to a lower output voltage.


----------



## Sound Eq

Triode User said:


> As has been said, this is the holiday season. Please do not get grumpy with people enjoying their holidays.
> 
> Some answers though (these are not guesses).
> 
> ...



 its all zreview fault for talking bout the manual of the adi dac/amp

wishing u and chord happy holidays


----------



## Arniesb (Dec 29, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> i think your answer could be an explanation, with curious alone i hear a difference than using cheap usb cables but let me tell you this, its only a tiny fraction better than this usb cable, which is cheap but really worth it
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/store/pr...365d-4a59-a562-3da31ab2223c&priceBeautifyAB=0


lol i have this along with AQ forest. It is much better than former, but no match To my wireworld. Wireworld is more quiet to me than Aucharm and it is more realistic sounding than Aucharm... Aucharm seems like it have some distortion simmilar to tube sound like there is something missing... . Qutest have decent usb implementation so there sould be much less noise than in my topping dx7 which have bad usb implementation in comparison to 2qute i tried few times.
I was about to buy Qutest too cause i always like 2qute sound, but decided to wait a little bit, maybe there could be some products release at ces or something...


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 29, 2018)

Arniesb said:


> lol i have this along with AQ forest. It is much better than former, but no match To my wireworld. Wireworld is more quiet to me than Aucharm and it is more realistic sounding than Aucharm... Aucharm seems like it have some distortion simmilar to tube sound like there is something missing... . Qutest have decent usb implementation so there sould be much less noise than in my topping dx7 which have bad usb implementation in comparison to 2qute i tried few times.
> I was about to buy Qutest too cause i always like 2qute sound, but decided to wait little bit, maybe there could be some producs release at ces or something...



 oh so u dont have the qutest, time to get grumpy again, just kiddin

qutest is a great dac no doubt, better than using hugo 2 as dac which i compared

did i mention how much i despise coldplay for their recording quality, dam listening to their albums just is a nightmare, even nikki minaj makes better quality recordings, dam coldplay as much i like your songs as much i dislike u , if anyone wants to dislike his gear just listen to coldplay 

enjoy the holidays


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> oh so u dont have the qutest, time to get grumpy again, just kiddin
> 
> qutest is a great dac no doubt, better than using hugo 2 as dac which i compared
> 
> enjoy the holidays


Enjoy u too thanks for your impressions about regen. Cheers.


----------



## TomWoB (Dec 29, 2018)

@ Jon L: stay cool !

I have (only) a 2qute, but if I compare pictures, it looks like that the same BNC connectors are used ... and if I check the board of my 2qute, *very close to the BNC connector I can find a 85X resistor, which is a 75 Ohm resistor*:


 

So, this seems to be fine, we have a "75 Ohm closing resistor". So the question is, how relevant is a (maybe) 50 Ohm connector with a 75 Ohm resistor ... I don't know. But I think the closing resistor is "much more relevant" than the connector. I made a tabular:

 

The tabular shows, how much reflections we have with a 75 Ohm cable on X Ohms end (DAC) !
E.g. we have a 1V signal running to a 70 Ohm end -> 0.034 x 1V = 34mV will be reflected and running back to the source (first = 1x reflection, minus means subtracted from 1V). In case of source has (also) a 70 Ohm end -> 0.001V = 1mV are running back to the DAC again (second = 2x reflection = 0.034 x 0.034).

So, in case of we use a 75 Ohm cable and the (maybe!!!) 50 Ohm connector with a 75 Ohm resistor creates maybe together a "70 Ohm end", we have the situation described in the example above. BTW, if source has a perfect 75 Ohm end, nothing is running back to the DAC, because second reflection will be 0.000 !

... and I still hope, the BNC connector itself has also 75 Ohm !
... and I'm usind BNC and I'm still relaxed, because BNC sounds great 

Regards Tom


----------



## Rob Watts

Sound Eq said:


> why is chord so silent in this thread, why can they not simply just answer such question, 50ohm or 75ohm, this frustrates me, I feel there is no interaction here at all from chord opposite other threads , as I was going to move to BNC now I have to guess what it is.
> 
> anyhow, I am a bit a newbie in connections, so how can `i connect my macbook pro to qutest using BNC and what is a good BNC cable that will not cost an arm and a leg
> 
> ...



@Triode User answered the voltage question perfectly (and he is on holiday too):



Triode User said:


> As has been said, this is the holiday season. Please do not get grumpy with people enjoying their holidays.
> 
> Some answers though (these are not guesses).
> 
> ...



As too the BNC connector issue, Chord have got back to me and confirmed that the data sheet for the PCB connector states 75 ohms. However, they are confirming from the supplier that it is indeed 75 ohms; but no answer yet as it is indeed the holiday season. The size difference would be explained by a different relative permittivity or dielectric constant of the insulation material. Note that you must use 75 ohm cable, as the M scaler sources are exactly 75 ohms, and the termination impedance is 75 ohms. This massively outweighs any other consideration.



Nik74 said:


> It’s holiday season and everyone needs a break even Chord!



Exactly.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Ι already solved the 75Ω riddle with a photo!


Zzt231gr said:


> Then why does my Canare 75Ω plug fits?


----------



## Triode User

Zzt231gr said:


> Ι already solved the 75Ω riddle with a photo!



Actually 50 ohm and 75 ohm connectors are relatively similar dimensions and will usually fit each other.


----------



## TomWoB

Hm ... now I'm a little bit confused:


----------



## Zzt231gr

TomWoB said:


> Hm ... now I'm a little bit confused:


I don't think that this correct.OTOH my cable was custom made and it is 75Ω.

But Rob already answered this,too!


----------



## Triode User

TomWoB said:


> Hm ... now I'm a little bit confused:



There is no need to be confused. They look different, have different impedences but they still normally fit the same fittings.


----------



## TomWoB (Dec 30, 2018)

Yes Zzt231gr, I believe your cable is 75 Ohm, because there is no dielectric material "on the plug itself". Any coax cable has dielectric material inside, that's clear, that's what we see on your photo.

I'm a liitle bit confused because of the dielectric material "at the Qutest connector" ... but I still hope it's 75 Ohm! As Rob said, let's wait for the official confirmation of the BNC supplier.


----------



## Triode User

TomWoB said:


> Yes Zzt231gr, I believe your cable is 75 Ohm, because there is no dielectric material "on the plug itself". Any coax cable has dielectric material inside, that's clear, that's what we see on your photo.
> 
> I'm a liitle bit confused because of the dielectric material "at the Qutest connector" ... but I still hope it's 75 Ohm! As Rob said, let's wait for the official confirmation of the BNC supplier.



There is dielectric material on the 75ohm plug, it is just in a different location to the 50 ohm plug. I am guessing that the dielectric position on the 50ohm plug is there to inhibit higher frequency RF leakage through the slots in the conductor. (50ohm is rated to a higher frequency than 75ohm)

I agree that the chassis sockets on the Chord equipment looks similar to 50 ohm sockets but it may well be that the configuration of the pc circuit is more important here. Indeed Canford say on this subject, "At frequencies of up to 10MHz, the characteristic impedance of the connector is completely swamped by the source and load impedance of the circuit of which it is part". In other words it probably doesn't matter one fig whether the chassis socket is 50 ohm or 75 ohm.  However it is still important to use properly rated 75ohm cables and cable connectors.


----------



## AndrewOld (Dec 30, 2018)

fwiw, the BNC connectors on the DAVE are noticeably different to those on the M Scaler - a good bit less dielectric.


----------



## TomWoB (Dec 30, 2018)

Hi all,

I'm "only" an owner of a 2qute, but I'm interested on a Qutest too. So I read the complete 2qute thread (114 pages) and this thread (183 pages) ... puhhh. Felt 2/3 off all posts in both threads are regarding LPS, stock PS, battery power, RF noise, etc. I really don't want to start discussion again, but I'm missing a little bit a discussion "about the whole system in our specific environments".

I have great respect for Robs knowledge of audio electronics and I think he's right with statements like "a LPS has no effect on the Qutest, but maybe an effect on the complete audio system". That's exact my point, we are talking a lot about USB has galvanic isolation, BNC not, ... but I can't remember, that someone was talking about the RCA connection to the amplifier, which is for sure not galvanic isolated! So there is a ground connection from main power -> amplifier -> Qutest and thus a risk of RF noise in our audio systems.

OK, I'm a big fan of LPS, I have no SPS in my audio system (2 Sboosters for RPI+Digione and 2qute), my headphone amplifier Lehmannaudio Linear has a build in LPS too. But I was still not 100% happy with the sound of my system. Especially because it sounds during the day worster than in the night (Robs experience sometimes too). BTW: I live in an apartment building with several washing machines, refrigerators and for sure with a lot of SPS. I can select 20+ WLANs from all our neighbours and so on ... so this brings me to the point I have to improve my main power. I know my Sboosters have good main filters build in, but my Lehmannaudio Linear looks like it has not. So ... even I live in Switzerland with nice Hydroelectric Power Stations I want to improve my "main power situation".

*Here comes my tip for you for next year: *
I bought an "Isotek EVO3 Sirius" power bar and what can I say ... I have a new audio system!
I plugged in only my three audio devices, so only these three LPS are "behind" the filtering of the audio power bar. My "normal power bar" powers all other devices like PC, Monitor, Laptop, NAS, lamps, USB-loaders, ... So, I really didn't expect such a big improvement ... wow! Better defined stereo image and all seems to be "more clear and relaxed", especially voices, incredible.




http://www.isoteksystems.com/products/performance/evo3-sirius/

Some more reasons for a good power bar:

I think you buy it once in a lifetime
will improve your complete system
will improve your "coming audio devices" too
Maybe you can try one ... I think good resellers offer to rent one for tests and for sure there are other good suppliers for audio power bars like: PS Audio, Vibex, ...

One more example how a SPS can influence "other plugged in audio devices" you can find in the Digione video from "The Hans Beekhuyzen Channel" (watch from 5:12): 

I strongly recommend: TRY IT !


----------



## Ragnar-BY

@Rob Watts thank you for explanations and for your work. I have such a great time now, rediscovering my music with Qutest. Have great holidays! 

Happy New Year, Head-Fi! My best wishes to all!


----------



## DMax99

I'm torn between the Hugo TT and Qutest as it seems the second hand price of the TT has dropped quite a bit. 

How do the 2 compare? 

Which one is more worth getting for the sound quality as I will only be using it for their dac section. I don't really need the head amp, Preamp nor Bluetooth functionality.

The ability to use the Qutest with the Mscaller sounds good though.

Cheers


----------



## Nik74

A no brainier really, if you are thinking of an M-Scaler in the near(ish) future.


----------



## DMax99

How about the sound between the 2 without the Mscaller?


----------



## Nik74

I don’t know , I have not heard the TT , only the TT2, Dave , my Qutest and the original Hugo


----------



## Gibson59 (Jan 2, 2019)

Just wanted to share some impressions since I had my first opportunity to spend extensive time with a Qutest and Hugo 2 today.  I compared them exhaustively for almost 3 hours.

Gear used in different combinations:

- Hifiman HE1000se (with a Lazuli Reference cable)
- Chord Hugo 2
- Chord Qutest
- Wells Audio Milo Amp
 - All power and RCA cables used were "high-end" (if you believe that cables matter, I do)

I'll give some context first.  I went into today expecting to want to buy the Hugo 2 based on everything i've read.  I mainly need a dedicated desktop DAC to serve both my headphones and speakers (I have a separate amp for the speakers), but the added benefit of mobility with the Hugo 2 is a nice plus.  I love the Milo amp, but am not 100% committed to it if any of the Chord gear sounds better without it.  In fact i'd love it if a chord amp drives the HE1000se well enough by itself that I can sell the Milo amp and put it towards other gear.

At the end of my listening session my order of preference of the gear combos I tried today (from most preferred to least preferred):

First Place:  Qutest -> Milo -> HE1000se
Second Place:  Hugo 2 -> HE1000se
Third Place:  Hugo 2 -> Milo -> HE1000se

To my surprise the Qutest into my Milo amp was an easy winner for me.  The sound sounded so lifelike, detailed and musical at the same time.  Closing my eyes it truly transported me like I was sitting in a room with my own private concert!  I really expected the Hugo 2 by itself to take first prize.  I'm also very surprised that the Qutest + Milo sounded very different from the Hugo 2 + Milo.

The Hugo 2 alone sounded awesome and technically drove the HE1000se just fine (I can see why this is enough for many people), but it just didn't do it for me compared to the Qutest combo.  The Qutest + Milo had a noticeably bigger soundstage, better 3D imaging, energy and just reached a bit deeper into the music for details.  I really thought both DACs in conjunction with the amp would sound identical and that was not the case.  If I absolutely needed portability I could be happy with just the Hugo 2, but that's not all that critical for me.  My highest priority is what I hear as the best sound quality.

I am going to wait until I have a chance to demo the Hugo TT 2 in a few weeks to make a final purchase decision.  But if I was to buy something today it would be the Qutest over the Hugo 2.


----------



## Gibson59

Forgot to mention... the Mscaler with both of these DACs (Qutest and Hugo 2)... OMG!  I almost don't want to think about it because I can't afford one yet.  But at some point I will absolutely own an Mscaler.  It's as good as everyone says.  At first I almost wasn't sure if I liked the sound because everything felt a bit subdued, then I realized I could turn the volume up higher than normal.  It wasn't that anything was subdued, it was that the backgorund was inky black and there was absolutely perfect control from beginning to end of every single note.  It was almost a strange experience to hear sound in such high definition like this.


----------



## x RELIC x

weissja36 said:


> Just wanted to share some brief impressions since I had my first opportunity to spend extensive time with a Qutest and Hugo 2 today.  I compared them exhaustively for almost 3 hours.
> 
> Gear used in different combinations:
> 
> ...



Hugo2 and Qutest have different analogue output stages so they would sound different. Qutest is based on Mojo's output stage (OP). See below:



Rob Watts said:


> Yes I too saw that... But 2 qute, although having a discrete op stage, is not powerful; it was never intended to drive any low impedance at all. Qutest op stage has been upgraded, but it's not the same as Hugo 2. The op impedance has not been measured, so any mention of it is an error. But I have increased the drive on the discrete op stage, and I have used the Mojo op stage. This has the benefit of being very small, but capable of delivering large currents. But let's be clear; qutest was designed as a DAC only! As an aside, the Mojo op stage is the same as Hugo 2 electronically, but differs with the packaging and power delivery of the op transistors.


----------



## KBerube80

This probably has been answered to death but I can't find it, so do you guys just leave your Qutest plugged in 24/7?


----------



## Qute Beats

KBerube80 said:


> This probably has been answered to death but I can't find it, so do you guys just leave your Qutest plugged in 24/7?


Yes.  Rob has said it only consumes around 3 Watts in standby (automatically goes to standby once no music playing for a bit).


----------



## x RELIC x

Rob Watts said:


> Thank-you. Power is only 2W, so no need to worry.


----------



## KBerube80

Qute Beats said:


> Yes.  Rob has said it only consumes around 3 Watts in standby (automatically goes to standby once no music playing for a bit).



Thanks for the reply.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

DMax99 said:


> Which one is more worth getting for the sound quality as I will only be using it for their dac section. I don't really need the head amp, Preamp nor Bluetooth functionality.


There is no point in first gen TT, if you don`t need amp and preamp. As a DAC Qutest would do better job than TT. Balanced output in TT might be better in some cases (long interconnects, special amp), but generally new generation of Chords is better than the old one.


----------



## odessamarin (Jan 3, 2019)

Ragnar-BY said:


> There is no point in first gen TT, if you don`t need amp and preamp. As a DAC Qutest would do better job than TT. Balanced output in TT might be better in some cases (long interconnects, special amp), but generally new generation of Chords is better than the old one.



I am not sure..  had Hugo2, Qutest and TT same time.. a lot of A/B listening.. Hugo2 and Qutest sold. TT stay in my gear. So, it depends. Also your impression regarding balanced stage is not complete.

@weissja36  if you have chance to listen TT, please do


----------



## DMax99

odessamarin said:


> I am not sure..  had Hugo2, Qutest and TT same time.. a lot of A/B listening.. Hugo2 and Qutest sold. TT stay in my gear. So, it depends. Also your impression regarding balanced stage is not complete.
> 
> @weissja36  if you have chance to listen TT, please do



In your opinion, how is the TT better than the Hugo2 and Qutest in sound?

Cheers


----------



## odessamarin (Jan 3, 2019)

@DMax99

To put it simple.
1. Hugo2 (worst) and Qutest sound less 3D! Imaging soundstage is very reduced (depth and vertical.. ) in compare to TT. Maybe for someone it's not important. But I think it's matter the one not heard it yet in his system. Once you get it, you cant accept it's reduction. At least for me.
2. New DAC sound more digital to me and timber flat. Its like all sounds (instruments,notes) pulled (normalized) to the same level. While TT do more accurate accents separation to instruments/voces. I dont know how to explain better.. I think its something to do with dynamic range. To my ear it 's more concentrated/condenced in new DACs from Hugo.. And indeed it is give an impression that music more textured and defined.. and to me it was first WOW impression, which take me two day to realize that I actually I missed more analogue sound of TT/Hugo classic. Sound form Hugo2/Qutest made me tired listening with time. It was harder to follow music motive (solo instrument).. which is important and almost always present in any track.. new DACs just put all sounds to you at the same level and time.. giving almost similar accents to instruments in stage. Obviously somebody just like it..
I used different headphones, same sources and tried all outputs.. even direct linear RCA from Qutest. With A/B listening you can easily get this impression.

And honestly.. Hugo2/Qutest users, don't you have impression that some of your favorite songs sounds different? The charterer and atmosphere? With Hugo2 and Qutest I had filling that my well known compositions just lose a lot their character. And albums start to play just "similar" to each others.. Anyway, this is my personal impression  and could be just my particular preferences.


----------



## DMax99

odessamarin said:


> @DMax99
> 
> To put it simple.
> 1. Hugo2 (worst) and Qutest sound less 3D! Imaging soundstage is very reduced (depth and vertical.. ) in compare to TT. Maybe for someone it's not important. But I think it's matter the one not heard it yet in his system. Once you get it, you cant accept it's reduction. At least for me.
> ...



Thank you for sharing your valuable opinions. That's why I love a forum like this!  

Have you tried the Qutest or TT2 with the Mscaler? Perhaps the sound may change with the Mscaler?


----------



## OG10 (Jan 3, 2019)

My Qutest is back from the AD 

Gosh I missed her.. I changed my inter connects to the Chord Clearway cables.. I am really enjoying it.

Of those of you who have moved to linear power supplies - have you found any differences, and is it worth the extra cash?


----------



## odessamarin

DMax99 said:


> Have you tried the Qutest or TT2 with the Mscaler? Perhaps the sound may change with the Mscaler?



Unfortunately not.. but really wish to )


----------



## AlexB73 (Jan 3, 2019)

I never seen such compatibility issue between RCA connectors before!

Yesterday I soldered KLEI Pure Harmony RCA connectors to my DIY Duelund DCA16GA cable.
When I connected these RCA to Qutest I damaged Qutest female RCA connector central pin contact.
After that, I opened Qutest and see contact plate was moved from its place.
I returned contact plate to it's place.
Now my Qutest works again! But I can't use KLEI RCA connectors with it.


----------



## Zzt231gr

AlexB73 said:


> I never seen such compatibility issue between RCA connectors before!
> 
> Yesterday I soldered KLEI Pure Harmony RCA connectors to my DIY Duelund DCA16GA cable.
> When I connected these RCA to Qutest I damaged Qutest female RCA connector central pin contact.
> ...


Do you have any pics?


----------



## OG10

I spoke too soon 



Chord did say I can send this directly if there was a fault. 

It worked for about 30 minutes, then this distorted horrendous sound appeared. Chord Mojo and my other DAC are working fine. 
There must be something wrong in the output stage.


----------



## AlexB73 (Jan 3, 2019)

No. I didn't do any pictures.
But you can see KLEI RCA pictures online. They have a little bit different design of the central pin.


----------



## Zzt231gr

OG10 said:


> I spoke too soon
> 
> 
> 
> ...



IIRC


OG10 said:


> I spoke too soon
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Something similar happened recently.


----------



## kovacs (Jan 3, 2019)

I’m still having problems with my RCA connectors, I have to support the cable from underneath to get any sound, don’t think I ever heard any distortion, it either works or it doesn’t. Tried different cables, the connection is very fragile, if I move the cable a hair I loose the connection... I was using a Bullet plug, which looks very similar to the KLEI RCA connector, when it first happened. Really not looking forward to sending the unit in for repair and be without this DAC for weeks


----------



## AlexB73

kovacs said:


> I’m still having problems with my RCA connectors, I have to support the cable from underneath to get any sound, don’t think I ever heard any distortion, it either works or it doesn’t. Tried different cables, the connection is very fragile, if I move the cable a hair I loose the connection... I was using a Bullet plug, which looks very similar to the KLEI RCA connector, when it first happened. Really not looking forward to sending the unit in for repair and be without this DAC for weeks


You can open you Qutest and see what is going on inside.
Maybe your contact plate jumped out of its place (like it was happen in my case).


----------



## OG10

Zzt231gr said:


> IIRC
> 
> Something similar happened recently.



Really?

I have sent the video to Chord, hopefully they will get back to me soon and I can send it off tomorrow. 1st world problems I know, but I can't live without this DAC!


----------



## Zzt231gr

kovacs said:


> I’m still having problems with my RCA connectors, I have to support the cable from underneath to get any sound, don’t think I ever heard any distortion, it either works or it doesn’t. Tried different cables, the connection is very fragile, if I move the cable a hair I loose the connection... I was using a Bullet plug, which looks very similar to the KLEI RCA connector, when it first happened. Really not looking forward to sending the unit in for repair and be without this DAC for weeks





AlexB73 said:


> You can open you Qutest and see what is going on inside.
> Maybe your contact plate jumped out of its place (like it was happen in my case).


I agree.Must be the same problem!


----------



## Zzt231gr

OG10 said:


> Really?
> 
> I have sent the video to Chord, hopefully they will get back to me soon and I can send it off tomorrow. 1st world problems I know, but I can't live without this DAC!


Yes!Search a few pages before this and find the post.Communicate with the fellow member and inform us what happened.I want to know for future reference.


----------



## kovacs (Jan 3, 2019)

AlexB73 said:


> You can open you Qutest and see what is going on inside.
> Maybe your contact plate jumped out of its place (like it was happen in my case).



Don’t think I will want to do that since my device is still under waranty, but can you post a picture of what to look for, where is the contact plate located ? Can you just push it back ?


----------



## Jon L

kovacs said:


> I was using a Bullet plug, which looks very similar to the KLEI RCA connector, when it first happened. Really not looking forward to sending the unit in for repair and be without this DAC for weeks



Hmm...I'm glad I read this, so I can avoid using any interconnects with Eichmann bullet plugs or KLEI plugs with my Qutest DAC.  
I tend to avoid these type of plugs anyway, as I've had a ton of issues in past with fragility and signal contact issues with these types of connectors.


----------



## OG10

Zzt231gr said:


> Yes!Search a few pages before this and find the post.Communicate with the fellow member and inform us what happened.I want to know for future reference.



I had a look at Kovac's post where he had one channel fading out. I am not sure If mine is RCA related since it worked as I was listening and then suddenly the distortion came through. During the transition into distortion it was connected to the Chord PSU. Per Rob's suggestion I have checked battery pack and another USB power supply - no dice 

Looks like I have to send it back to Chord.


----------



## AlexB73

kovacs said:


> Don’t think I will want to do that since my device is still under waranty, but can you post a picture of what to look for, where is the contact plate located ? Can you just push it back ?


I afraid to push it again because it can break connectors.
But if you open Qutest and look inside you will see very it clearly if connector plate is out.
In my case right connector plate was in place and left connector plate was jumped out.


----------



## AlexB73

Jon L said:


> Hmm...I'm glad I read this, so I can avoid using any interconnects with Eichmann bullet plugs or KLEI plugs with my Qutest DAC.
> I tend to avoid these type of plugs anyway, as I've had a ton of issues in past with fragility and signal contact issues with these types of connectors.


Do you like the sound of KLEI plugs?
What kind RCA connectors do you like?


----------



## Zzt231gr

OG10 said:


> I had a look at Kovac's post where he had one channel fading out. I am not sure If mine is RCA related since it worked as I was listening and then suddenly the distortion came through. During the transition into distortion it was connected to the Chord PSU. Per Rob's suggestion I have checked battery pack and another USB power supply - no dice
> 
> Looks like I have to send it back to Chord.


Good luck,my friend.

But I was talking for another post.I remember distortion mentioned...


----------



## TomWoB (Jan 3, 2019)

So, that nobody has such problems with these (cheap) plugs/connectors, I can strongly recommend the following cable:

*QED Reference Audio 40  
https://www.qed.co.uk/cables/analogue/reference-audio-40.html#tab1


 *

it sounds absolute fantastic
the plugs go very easy over the female connectors of a device
then you "screw" the plug on the female connector
very good and stable connection
flexible cable
Btw: I was never happy with the connectors of Chord devices:

too close together
not tight enough mounted
somehow too "cheap" for a several thousand expensive device


----------



## AlexB73

I used Qutest and 2qute with RCA connectors made by:
Duelund, Switchcraft, Xhadow, Acrotec, MS Audio, Vampire without any issue.
But I'm agreed, for such not cheap device it is possible to use better RCA connectors than these cheap PCB mounted connectors.


----------



## kovacs

AlexB73 said:


> You can open you Qutest and see what is going on inside.
> Maybe your contact plate jumped out of its place (like it was happen in my case).



Would you be able to gently pull it back with some tweezers through the opening of the connector without opening the device ?


----------



## AlexB73

kovacs said:


> Would you be able to gently pull it back with some tweezers through the opening of the connector without opening the device ?


No, it looks impossible to fix from outside.
But it is not problem to open Qutest. you need just to unscrew 6 screws. It very easy to do and it is very easy to assembly it back. 
You don't have to be a "handy man".


----------



## OG10

Chord thankfully have said I can send mine back to them. Now for the nervous wait for when it will be back :S 

Thankfully I have a MOJO to keep me company till then!


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Need some advice about digital transport for Qutest, please.

Right now I`m using my Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Sounds good, although I constantly saw different people saying coaxial would sound better. Want to give it a try. 

My first plan was to buy ALLO DigiOne Signature and set up Roon core at my laptop and Roon endpoint at ALLO. But than I saw ALLO`s specs and found out that it`s coaxial output is limited to 24/192. I have some beautiful recordings in DXD (24/352,8) from nativedsd.com and 24/192 isn`t enough. Qutest manual says that it would accept up to 32/384 via coax, but I can`t find any transport that would be capable of streaming more than 24/192 via coaxial output. Various USB to S/PDIF converters also are limited to 24/192.

Any ideas for hi-res coaxial transport?


----------



## plsvn

Ragnar-BY said:


> Any ideas for hi-res coaxial transport?



only transports (I know of) claiming up to DSD64 on coaxial are the Lumin U1/U1 Mini and only USB/SPDIF converter capable of PCM 384/DSD64 is the Audiophilleo SE

fear you’re pretty much out of luck  unless you go USB


----------



## Joe-Siow

Check out the Singxer SU-6. The SPDIF out is capable of PCM 384 and DSD 512. Price is hefty though.

https://m.shenzhenaudio.com/singxer...08-cpld-femtosecond-clock-ship-interface.html


----------



## miketlse

Ragnar-BY said:


> Need some advice about digital transport for Qutest, please.
> 
> Right now I`m using my Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Sounds good, although I constantly saw different people saying coaxial would sound better. Want to give it a try.
> 
> ...


24/192 is the upper limit for the S/PDIF standard, so anything transmitting above this is a bespoke implementation.


----------



## malenak

AlexB73 said:


> I used Qutest and 2qute with RCA connectors made by:
> Duelund, Switchcraft, Xhadow, Acrotec, MS Audio, Vampire without any issue.
> But I'm agreed, for such not cheap device it is possible to use better RCA connectors than these cheap PCB mounted connectors.


How does they sounds comparing to each other? Qutest vs. 2Qute?


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Well, it seems Audiophilleo SE and Singxer SU-6 are the only options right now. I wonder if the Audiophilleo is worth it`s price.


----------



## AlexB73

malenak said:


> How does they sounds comparing to each other? Qutest vs. 2Qute?


I use 2qute on my work now.
I didn't compared them A-B. I can just tell you comparison to what l remember about 2qute sound.
Qutest has more detailed and grain free high frequencies, more strong and powerful bass.
Midrange and general tonal balance are very similar. Qutest has better separation and sooundstage.
The difference between two DACs is notable but not huge.


----------



## powerincarnate (Jan 5, 2019)

Please assist me with getting a DAC/AMP, my preferred max price range is about $1000 to $1200, but would be open to extending it slightly .  I know some examples that I mentioned below are outside the price range, but I do want to hear your opinions regardless.  I do have a MrSpeakers Alpha Dog, and may elect to upgrade that later.  Finally, the other option is to upgrade my subwoofer, for home home speakers as I have Three LS50s in LCR setup with a denon 4400 receiver.  What I'm looking for is not only A is better than B, but how much is A better than B and is that difference worth the price increase.  So here are some of my choices.

1. SMSL SU8 ahd SH8 which together should run somewhat close to $500-550. 
2.  JDS El Dac and El Amp OR simpy the Element.  The first two will be about the same as the SU8 and SH8 the second should be about $350.
3.  IFI micro iDSD Black label:  which should run about $599. 
4.  The upcoming March Dac with Massdrop  789 amp (i was working nights when the drop was still available, saw it, decided to go to sleep, and then when I work up, the drop ended back in late december.  Hopefully massdrop makes it a permanently available product soon. 
5.  Monopricce THX Desktop Headphone dac/amp with dual THX 788 as oppose to Massdrops 789.  It's ~$500
6  SMSL SU8 or JDS El DAC with MassDrop 789 which should be about $600
7.  Audio dg r2r 11 for $350, or NFB-11.38 for $450
8.  PS Audio Sprout 100 for $599
9.  RME ADI-2 DAC for $1100 using it stock without an additional AMP
10.  RME ADI-2 DAC with Massdrop 789 for $1450. 
11.  Chord Qutest with Massdrop 789 AMP for $2250

One last one.  

A lot of choices, organized relatively speaking from  cheapest to most expensive.  Up to 9 is fairly reasonable, above 10 in stretching it.  11 would have to justify the cost. 

Thank you.


----------



## maxxevv

Firstly, you're asking in the wrong thread, the people here will be partial towards the Qutest. Period. 

As for your list, based on what I have gathered so far: 

1. The SMSL pair can be had for under $400 together from Massdrop. 
2. The JDS Atom is currently its best measuring headphone amp. Its listed at $100. 
6. The SMSL SU-8 with the Massdrop THX789 should yield you the best bang for the buck at very near the top end of "transparency" which seems to be your aim here. 
7. The Audio-GD stuff are to be considered only IF you like some "coloration", they don't measure very well as compared to almost all the other DAC's listed in your list here. (But people seem to like them for some reason which I'm not aware of. )
9 and 10. There's very little to be gained from adding an amp to the RME. 
11. Probably the best overall terms of measurements. And the most expensive.You can probably save a few dollars by pairing with the JDS Atom here since you won't be making full use of the THX's XLR inputs with the Qutest.


----------



## odessamarin (Jan 6, 2019)

Ragnar-BY said:


> Need some advice about digital transport for Qutest, please.
> 
> Right now I`m using my Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Sounds good, although I constantly saw different people saying coaxial would sound better. Want to give it a try.
> 
> ...



almost any 200-300$ dap can do this perfectly. Coax digital out.. 2 sd cards support... done. Fiio x3ii, fiiox5ii.. if you need streaming.. look for one with android. Hiby, fili x5iii, x7
sq will outperform usb interface. guaranteed.


----------



## Skampmeister

Just paired up my Qutest with an M Scaler, so my suggestion to those who haven’t, well you should


----------



## Joe-Siow

Skampmeister said:


> Just paired up my Qutest with an M Scaler, so my suggestion to those who haven’t, well you should



My heart agrees wholeheartedly, but my bank accounts is retching violently


----------



## Lodwales81

Ragnar-BY said:


> Well, it seems Audiophilleo SE and Singxer SU-6 are the only options right now. I wonder if the Audiophilleo is worth it`s price.


I have also looked at the singxer as an option for my qutest, but most people tend to purchase them for there hdmi (i2s). I previously owned a schiit Mani that was highly rated but I sold and purchased a SMS 200 with is USB.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

odessamarin said:


> almost any 200-300$ dap can do this perfectly. Coax digital out.. 2 sd cards support... done. Fiio x3ii, fiiox5ii.. if you need streaming.. look for one with android. Hiby, fili x5iii, x7
> sq will outperform usb interface. guaranteed.


Did not find coaxial output specs for Fiio x5 or x7. Official website just mentions that output without any comments on max sample rate.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Joe-Siow said:


> My heart agrees wholeheartedly, but my bank accounts is retching violently


+1

Hugo M scaler costs 3x times more than Qutest. It might be reasonable addition for more expensive DACs, like Hugo TT2. But I hope Chord will release more affordable M scaler model for Qutest. I do like the idea of Qutest - minimalist DAC with one main function (which is done extremly well). I think some kind of "minimalist M Scaler" with one USB-input would be successful too.


----------



## dac64

Ragnar-BY said:


> +1
> 
> Hugo M scaler costs 3x times more than Qutest. It might be reasonable addition for more expensive DACs, like Hugo TT2. But I hope Chord will release more affordable M scaler model for Qutest. I do like the idea of Qutest - minimalist DAC with one main function (which is done extremly well). I think some kind of "minimalist M Scaler" with one USB-input would be successful too.



It might be reasonable addition for more expensive DACs, like Hugo TT2. - 100% or totally wrong.

But I hope Chord will release more affordable M scaler model for Qutest. - wrong again. it will never happen!


----------



## Ragnar-BY

dac64 said:


> wrong again. it will never happen!


Why not? A year ago we had only one upscaling option from Chord. It was Blu and Blu was even more expensive.

Existing Hugo M Scaler have a lot of functions: USB, BNC and 2 optical inputs; optical, S/PDIF and dual-BNC outputs; video-mode. I don`t need all this bells and whistles and I think there are a lot of people with similar thoughts. An M Scaler with one USB-input and one Dual-BNC output should be cheaper to build and difference in functions would be enough to separate it from Hugo M Scaler.

Of course, it would not be released soon. From business perspective it is wise to wait some time to sell enough Hugo M Scalers and introduce cheaper product only after that.


----------



## GreenBow (Jan 6, 2019)

The M-Scaler uses one million taps. Apparently the magic of the M-Scaler happens between 500,000 and 1,000,000 taps. There is improvement up to 500,00 taps, but the real magic they say happens using the full 1,000,000 taps.

(That might mean that a cut-down version of M-Scaler is not really an option.)

However almost all users are saying that Hugo 2/Qutest with M-scaler, outperforms DAVE. Leaving you with a DAC better than DAVE at half the price. ... I don't know. Up to you. I am just repeating what I have read from others.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Ragnar-BY said:


> Why not? A year ago we had only one upscaling option from Chord. It was Blu and Blu was even more expensive.
> 
> Existing Hugo M Scaler have a lot of functions: USB, BNC and 2 optical inputs; optical, S/PDIF and dual-BNC outputs; video-mode. I don`t need all this bells and whistles and I think there are a lot of people with similar thoughts. An M Scaler with one USB-input and one Dual-BNC output should be cheaper to build and difference in functions would be enough to separate it from Hugo M Scaler.
> 
> Of course, it would not be released soon. From business perspective it is wise to wait some time to sell enough Hugo M Scalers and introduce cheaper product only after that.



I love your optimism. I really do. And for the sake of my bank account I wish it was the case but I do not believe there will be a lower end version of the HMS.

Having the 3 price points of DACs (Dave, TT2 & Hugo 2/ Qutest) makes sense to capture the different segments of the DAC market.
However, while Blu2 and HMS are also digital products, they are not DACs; they are upscaler for the DACs.
HMS exists because some consumers do not need the CD transport, and Chord is able to provide the upscaling technology without the CD transport at a lower cost.

Having 3 upscaling products in this category will just lead to cannibalization of the Blu2 and HMS sales.


----------



## 486930

Hey! I’m building a system from scratch and now only lack a streamer. I’m have the Qutest obviously and would really like to hear anyone from anyone who uses the Innuous ZenMini mk3 or the Stream Box S2 Ultra fra Pro-ject? Optimally someone has auditioned both and can offer their advice. I can live with either from a practical standpoint, so I’m mostly interested in their SQ and synergy with Qutest. 

Thanks a bunch


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Joe-Siow said:


> Having 3 upscaling products in this category will just lead to cannibalization of the Blu2 and HMS sales.


Well, without knowledge of actual sales numbers we can only guess. But I think hypothetical "Q Scaler" is not impossible.


----------



## Skampmeister

Regardless of its triple cost, the Qutest severely benefits from the Scaler. I may buy a TT2, but one has to stop somewhere……………… I fink


----------



## Joe-Siow

I personally have not heard the HMS yet, but some of my friends have tried the Qutest and Blu2. The general opinion was that the combo is sublime and game changing.


----------



## x RELIC x

odessamarin said:


> almost any 200-300$ dap can do this perfectly. Coax digital out.. 2 sd cards support... done. Fiio x3ii, fiiox5ii.. if you need streaming.. look for one with android. Hiby, fili *x5iii*, x7
> sq will outperform usb interface. guaranteed.



FYI, the X5iii downsamples 24/192 through coaxial to 96kHz, and with USB audio output it actually downsamples to 48kHz. It’s been one of the most disappointing portable devices I’ve ever used as a transport. I purchased it specifically for the Hugo2 but I never use it because it does not pass along the sample rate unaltered, as promised by FiiO. The GUI is also very slow and gapless playback is hit and miss (I use lossless ALAC and FLAC files). The X5 and X5ii work flawlessly for bitperfect coaxial output but obviously no apps for Tidal, etc.. Firmware updates are slow and when they do come out they often break more things than they fix.

I would NOT recommend to anyone the X5iii for a transport. I can't speak for the rest of the FiiO line.


----------



## odessamarin

@x RELIC x 

yes, right. regarding Fiio X5iii, same here. Sold it as well. Confirmed.
X3ii and X5ii.. is stable as TANK for coaxial transport.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Malmbak said:


> Hey! I’m building a system from scratch and now only lack a streamer. I’m have the Qutest obviously and would really like to hear anyone from anyone who uses the Innuous ZenMini mk3 or the Stream Box S2 Ultra fra Pro-ject? Optimally someone has auditioned both and can offer their advice. I can live with either from a practical standpoint, so I’m mostly interested in their SQ and synergy with Qutest.
> 
> Thanks a bunch


You can add Euphony PTS server to this list.

I have not heard the Pro-Ject Stream Box S2 Ultra yet, but it`s price brings up some questions. The cheapest EU price, which I have found online is around 700 Euro. Add 300 euro and you can buy basic Euphony PTS (250Gb SSD included) or a basic Innuos ZenMini Mk3 (1TB HDD included). Euphony and Innuos are music servers and could run Roon core, Zen is also capable of CD ripping. Pro-Ject S2 Strem Box can only do streaming and endpoints. You still need some kind of network storage. And if you are a Roon user, you`ll need a computer to run Roon core.

 It is very interesting if Pro-Ject really made Rasberry Pi to sound so good, that it could justify this price level without extra functionality.


----------



## jwbrent (Jan 7, 2019)

Malmbak said:


> Hey! I’m building a system from scratch and now only lack a streamer. I’m have the Qutest obviously and would really like to hear anyone from anyone who uses the Innuous ZenMini mk3 or the Stream Box S2 Ultra fra Pro-ject? Optimally someone has auditioned both and can offer their advice. I can live with either from a practical standpoint, so I’m mostly interested in their SQ and synergy with Qutest.
> 
> Thanks a bunch



I’m in the same boat. I’m using a 6 year old MacBook Air as a bridge for my music files stored on an external hard drive and my Qutest. The new Project has caught my eye since its at the price point I’m looking to spend. With that said, I just learned about the new Stack Audio Link made in Britain and it looks pretty sweet, so I’m waiting for it to be released.

Stack Audio


----------



## ATXKyle

jwbrent said:


> I’m in the same boat. I’m using a 6 year old MacBook Air as a bridge for my music files stored on an external hard drive and my Qutest. The new Project has caught my eye since its at the price point I’m looking to spend. With that said, I just learned about the new Stack Audio Link made in Britain and it looks pretty sweet, so I’m waiting for it to be released.
> 
> Stack Audio


I use the Sonore microRendu 1.4 which does a good job, but recently many folks have started to swear by using an Intel NUC running the latest version of audiolinux OS (from RAM, no hard disk) as a streamer.  Apparently this sounds amazing, if I were in the market for a new streamer that’s what I’d do.


----------



## Christer

Joe-Siow said:


> I love your optimism. I really do. And for the sake of my bank account I wish it was the case but I do not believe there will be a lower end version of the HMS.
> 
> Having the 3 price points of DACs (Dave, TT2 & Hugo 2/ Qutest) makes sense to capture the different segments of the DAC market.
> However, while Blu2 and HMS are also digital products, they are not DACs; they are upscaler for the DACs.
> ...



Well according to Rob himself,and he can NOT claim I am misquoting him in this case.

He said at a seminar at Canjam in Singapore last year that personally he wants the mscaling  to become available in" HUGO 3 or 4."
 That is a direct  quote: I was there and personally talked to him about it afterwards.
So I would not absolutely rule out a cheaper M Scaler.
But do not expect one  in the immediate future unfortunately.
A shame that we still have to play the game according to the saying: 

"The only difference between men and boys
is the price of their toys".

My advice to those interested is still, if you mainly listen to well recorded acoustic music  M Scaler  extremely expensive as it unfortunatetly still is, is something you should audidition  if you want to hear how natural and realistic digital recordings can sound with mscaling applied.
And if your preferences are elsewhere I still don't  understand why anyone would spend this much money on something that is obviously designed to keep distortions and other  typical digital artefacts as low as possible.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes that's very much the intent - to get M scaling into a lower price - but I am less optimistic than I was last year. Getting M scaling to work at lower price points needs lower cost and more capable FPGAs and this is looking less likely; cost per gate as process is shrinking is actually increasing, and this has never happened before. In this sense, Moore's law has already broken. The whole point of more complexity is that it occurs at a lower cost per gate, and this is what has driven electronics over the last 50 years; but that process has stopped.

Another point - Xilinx used to create new FPGA generations where each family had more capability at a lower price, and this used to happen every 2 or 3 years; today the economic price point is the Artix 7, and that family was launched 6 years ago, with no replacement in sight or rumored about.

Another point - Intel has had serious problems migrating from 14nm to 10nm process, with speculation that the 10nm process has been cancelled - which Intel denies. But for sure they are having serious problems migrating down to 10nm, and it looks like it won't get shipped till 2019 - that will make the process 3 years late.

So I am not so optimistic as before - it may actually never happen if they can't make die shinkages with lower cost.


----------



## 486930

Ragnar-BY said:


> You can add Euphony PTS server to this list.
> 
> I have not heard the Pro-Ject Stream Box S2 Ultra yet, but it`s price brings up some questions. The cheapest EU price, which I have found online is around 700 Euro. Add 300 euro and you can buy basic Euphony PTS (250Gb SSD included) or a basic Innuos ZenMini Mk3 (1TB HDD included). Euphony and Innuos are music servers and could run Roon core, Zen is also capable of CD ripping. Pro-Ject S2 Strem Box can only do streaming and endpoints. You still need some kind of network storage. And if you are a Roon user, you`ll need a computer to run Roon core.
> 
> It is very interesting if Pro-Ject really made Rasberry Pi to sound so good, that it could justify this price level without extra functionality.



Thanks... For me their practical qualities are secondary to how they sound. The Digione Signature could also be in the mix for less than half the price of the S2 Ultra. I would use either as a Roon Endpoint. It is simply a question of SQ for me. 

Any input on their sound with the Qutest is appreciated. Thanks


----------



## TomWoB

Ragnar-BY said:


> You can add Euphony PTS server to this list.
> 
> I have not heard the Pro-Ject Stream Box S2 Ultra yet, but it`s price brings up some questions. The cheapest EU price, which I have found online is around 700 Euro. Add 300 euro and you can buy basic Euphony PTS (250Gb SSD included) or a basic Innuos ZenMini Mk3 (1TB HDD included). Euphony and Innuos are music servers and could run Roon core, Zen is also capable of CD ripping. Pro-Ject S2 Strem Box can only do streaming and endpoints. You still need some kind of network storage. And if you are a Roon user, you`ll need a computer to run Roon core.
> 
> It is very interesting if Pro-Ject really made Rasberry Pi to sound so good, that it could justify this price level without extra functionality.



Hi Ragnar-BY,
normally I don't like streamers with build-in HDDs or SSDs, because they are typically overprized. E.g. upgrade from ZenMini Mk3 1 TB HDD -> 8 TB HDD = 600 Euro(!). The Pro-Ject Stream Box S2 Ultra has a USB-Port on the back, especially for storage, so you can use this to connect e.g. a SSD. I do this on my Raspberry Pi (btw: S2 Ultra has a Raspberry Pi inside too) with the following *Icy Box IB-233U3-B*:


 
https://raidsonic.de/en/standards/searchresults.php?we_objectID=3190

Inside I use a Samsung 1TB Evo SSD, which works very well (SSD are strongly recommended, because they are total silent and have low power consumption). So, for me there is no need for an additional device "for storage", the SDD will deliver the data "bit perfect". I use my Raspberry Pi together with a Digione (the "normal one", not Signature). I think together with a DAC like Qutest there is no need to reduce jitter from 0.6 ps -> 0.4 ps (!), because Robs "DPLL thing" anyway eliminates completely any source jitter.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

TomWoB said:


> Inside I use a Samsung 1TB Evo SSD, which works very well (SSD are strongly recommended, because they are total silent and have low power consumption). So, for me there is no need for an additional device "for storage", the SDD will deliver the data "bit perfect". I use my Raspberry Pi together with a Digione (the "normal one", not Signature). I think together with a DAC like Qutest there is no need to reduce jitter from 0.6 ps -> 0.4 ps (!), because Robs "DPLL thing" anyway eliminates completely any source jitter.


Hi!
Indeed, SSDs are superior. If you don`t need Roon, Stream Box or even basic Pasberry Pi might be good solution. ALLO Digione sounds great. I did not buy it only because of its 24/192 limit on BNC output.

By the way, I think that Qutest USB input is great. My previous USB-DAC sounded awful without USB decrapifier. I used Schiit Wyrd and it was significant upgrade over direct connection. With Qutest USB-decrapifier makes so small changes, that I`m not even sure if it is a positive change. After some listening, I decided to put Wyrd away from the system. With all this in mind, I can`t wait to hear Qutest from good coaxial source.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

@Rob Watts thank you for the info. Very interesting, as always.

Can you help me with DSD-playback, please? 
I`m using Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Music in DSD256 from nativedsd.com. There are no problems with PCM hi-res, including DXD (24/352,8). Only with DSD. I`ve tried three different players: latest Audirvana, Colibri and Bitperfect with it`s DSD Master add-on. 

Colibri makes the worst experience. It plays DSD, but I get a lot of clicks during playback. Audirvana with default settings plays .dsf file good, but Qutest light was blue, not white. Processor usage significantly raised, so I assume some type of conversion was involved. If I set Audirvana to DoP I get white light, but there are clicks during playback. Much less clicks than it was with Colibri, but still.

Creating "Hybrid-DSD" with DSD Master and playing it with BitPerfect is not the most comfortable solution, but sounds better. I still had some clicks, but much less than in previous cases. After taking the USB-decrapifier out of chain, I found that I have less clicks. After changing my USB-cable with more expensive one (AudioQuest Cinnamon) situation improved once again. 

Now everything sounds great, but occasionally I might have one or two clicks during the playback of one track. I don`t understand what`s the reason. Is it my USB output to blame, or my software. Unfortunately, I don`t have any other sources, capable of DSD streaming, to check if it`s a problem with my DAC.


----------



## Nejiro (Jan 9, 2019)

As you write it seems that the coax is better than the usb, I'm really very satisfied with my Qutest that I've always used with the usb (with Intel nuc, windows 10 and Foobar) , the difference is so much that it is worth spending on an interface that allows you to use the Qutest with the bnc?


----------



## Rob Watts

Ragnar-BY said:


> @Rob Watts thank you for the info. Very interesting, as always.
> 
> Can you help me with DSD-playback, please?
> I`m using Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Music in DSD256 from nativedsd.com. There are no problems with PCM hi-res, including DXD (24/352,8). Only with DSD. I`ve tried three different players: latest Audirvana, Colibri and Bitperfect with it`s DSD Master add-on.
> ...



I use JRiver on a Windows 10 machine and don't have click issues with DSD - even with DSD512 (then using Chords ASIO driver with native interface format).

So I asked Matt at Chord as he has more experience with Apple and he suggested:

"On the Mac he needs to check that he is not running time machine or any other type of backup or program/process that might be 
taking up additional resources on the computer processor. He should also try a different USB port or hub as the Mac tends to share
it's USB bus with other peripherals like the track pad and camera and they can interfere. 

Finally he could try with a free trial of Roon just to see what happens."


----------



## flyte3333

Ragnar-BY said:


> @Rob Watts thank you for the info. Very interesting, as always.
> 
> Can you help me with DSD-playback, please?
> I`m using Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Music in DSD256 from nativedsd.com. There are no problems with PCM hi-res, including DXD (24/352,8). Only with DSD. I`ve tried three different players: latest Audirvana, Colibri and Bitperfect with it`s DSD Master add-on.
> ...



Another thing to try, with Audirvana - try up-sampling to PCM705/768kHz (since there's no recordings) to Qutest. Just as a test only.

Because if PCM705/768kHz struggles in your chain, DoP256 won't work well either.


----------



## Nejiro

At the moment I do not feel the need to put an interface to use the coax but if it really sounds better you could try, what do you think of the Gustard U16? https://m.shenzhenaudio.com/gustard...512-dop-and-native-dsd-digital-interface.html


----------



## paulkwan

I just try connect my dCS NB dual AES to Qutest, It can playback all sample rate music (PCM & DSD, even DSD128) without any problem all night, except those sample rate equal to or below the "Dual AES Sample Rate" config in dCS NB settings.  They will playback in mono, and suffer random pops and clicks noise.



 
dCS NB manual at https://www.dcsltd.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Network-Bridge-Manual-v1_0x.pdf

Any suggestion or experience can share ?
Meanwhile, I have config the "Dual AES Sample Rate" to 88.2k, and use Roon to upsample music =< 88.2k to 96k or above, and this works flawlessly.

Seems NB only use dual AES mode for upper sample rate, but Qutest use this for all if it sense it is in dual connection.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Rob Watts said:


> "On the Mac he needs to check that he is not running time machine or any other type of backup or program/process that might be
> taking up additional resources on the computer processor. He should also try a different USB port or hub as the Mac tends to share
> it's USB bus with other peripherals like the track pad and camera and they can interfere.
> 
> Finally he could try with a free trial of Roon just to see what happens."


Thank you for directions.
There was almost no load on processor, but I will try to experiment in this direction and quit all programs during playback.

And indeed, there is difference between USB ports on MacBook Pro. Mine is "late 2013 model" and it`s left-side USB port sounds significantly better than one on the right side.

By the way... I wanted to ask about BNC inputs, but I assume you`ve already answered a lot of questions about different digital inputs. Can you give a link to explanation why coax inputs sounds better?


----------



## flyte3333

Hi all

Can someone please post a photo of the included 5Vdc power supply that comes with Qutest?

If possible, a clear photo showing the text on the PSU.

Cheers!


----------



## Triode User (Jan 10, 2019)

Stereophile review of Qutest.

STEREOPHILE QUTEST


----------



## JezR

Em2016 said:


> Hi all
> 
> Can someone please post a photo of the included 5Vdc power supply that comes with Qutest?
> 
> ...



Hope this helps.


----------



## flyte3333

JezR said:


> Hope this helps.



Thanks Jez! 

Just to confirm, that's for your Qutest?

It looks to be identical to Hugo2, which is what I was looking to confirm.


----------



## JezR

Em2016 said:


> Thanks Jez!
> 
> Just to confirm, that's for your Qutest?
> 
> It looks to be identical to Hugo2, which is what I was looking to confirm.



Yes, and in the middle of the label it shows pin out of the + and -  on the micro USB, next to where it say's 5 volt 2.1 A.


----------



## Sound Eq (Jan 12, 2019)

i got a usb to optical converter, and it was a waste of money to buy it. Details were lost , and too warm and lifeless, definitely usb sounds way better

so i got iso regen, curious cables, and this usb to optical converter, how much did it improve from using the stock usb cable, maybe max 1% with using just the usb cables\

I am done chasing suggestions to improve the sound of the qutest, it was great with just using stock everything

love the qutest with my ifi ican pro and meze empyrean

save your money and buy good headphones instead thats my  advise,


----------



## Triode User

Sound Eq said:


> *i got a usb to optical converter, and it was a waste of money to buy it. Details were lost , and too warm and lifeless*, definitely usb sounds way better
> so i got iso regen, curious cables, and this usb to optical converter, how much did it improve from using the stock usb cable, maybe max 1% with using just the usb cables\
> I am done chasing useless suggestions to improve the sound of the qutest, it was great with just using stock everything, no need for anyone to look more into all the hypes around use this or that
> love the qutest with my ifi ican pro and meze empyrean
> save your money and buy good headphones instead of all these useless advises



On the basis that the actual digital signal was not being changed, the details that you say were lost might just have been false detail due to RF noise on your USB source. Your comment about warmth and being lifeless is also consistent with getting rid of RF noise. 

It might just be that the optical connection was the most accurate . . . . . .


----------



## Sound Eq

Triode User said:


> On the basis that the actual digital signal was not being changed, the details that you say were lost might just have been false detail due to RF noise on your USB source. Your comment about warmth and being lifeless is also consistent with getting rid of RF noise.
> 
> It might just be that the optical connection was the most accurate . . . . . .



then definitely i like RF noise  the more the merrier


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> On the basis that the actual digital signal was not being changed, the details that you say were lost might just have been false detail due to RF noise on your USB source. Your comment about warmth and being lifeless is also consistent with getting rid of RF noise.
> 
> It might just be that the optical connection was the most accurate . . . . . .


Ha ha great post!!! i watched some movies with usb toys and it certainly sound worse for movies cause it removed sharpness which movies need. For music it is better. Some people have warm gear and they could easily like rf noise too. Absolutely spot on!


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> Ha ha great post!!! i watched some movies with usb toys and it certainly sound worse for movies cause it removed sharpness which movies need. For music it is better. Some people have warm gear and they could easily like rf noise too. Absolutely spot on!



Have you ever watched a TV where the sharpness and colour settings have been turned up? Some people like their tellies like that but it is not accurate. 

I was once made to sit through one of the Lord of the Rings movies at a friends house where he had a new huge TV with the sharpness turned up and all I could see was the horrible digital artifacts due to the artificial sharpening all the way through the movie. I do a lot of work with digital images and overuse of the PhotoShop unsharp mask (which actually applies sharpening) is easy to spot and is horrible.


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> Have you ever watched a TV where the sharpness and colour settings have been turned up? Some people like their tellies like that but it is not accurate.
> 
> I was once made to sit through one of the Lord of the Rings movies at a friends house where he had a new huge TV with the sharpness turned up and all I could see was the horrible digital artifacts due to the artificial sharpening all the way through the movie. I do a lot of work with digital images and overuse of the PhotoShop unsharp mask (which actually applies sharpening) is easy to spot and is horrible.


1 thing for sure! Such things only impress at first in the long run its annoys. Thats why i like Sony Tvs very accurate colors unlike Samsungs. Even on my monitor i use 0 vibrance settings.


----------



## musickid

the usb-optical convertors can in fact change and alter the digital signal to the worse especially the cheap chinese ones. stay well clear i say. always direct into chord dacs..


----------



## Triode User

musickid said:


> the usb-optical convertors can in fact change and alter the digital signal to the worse especially the cheap chinese ones. stay well clear i say. always direct into chord dacs..



Really? How does this manifest itself? Pops and clicks or are you saying the music signal is changed? I would find it hard to understand the latter.


----------



## musickid (Jan 12, 2019)

the accuracy of the oscillating crystals (responsible for timing and clocking the audio signal) inside alot of these cheap chinese ddc's leaves alot to be desired. the problem is that your computer can tell you the sample rate that it spits out on screen but there is no way of graphically representing on a screen the sample rate that the ddc is spitting out so you are at its mercy. alot of folk use these 100 pound chinese ones and just as i was going to get one i got a message from the top here on headfi warning me against not just the cheap ones but all of them from any country. i struggled with this point a long while back as i felt instinctively something was wrong.


----------



## Ragnar-BY (Jan 12, 2019)

I`ve read many times that optical is the worst audio interface due to highest jitter. Don`t know is it true or false, but i see a lot of high quality USB-coax converters (like Audiophilleo) and very few of USB-optical (actually I can`t recall any, except of cheap Chinese converters).


----------



## musickid (Jan 12, 2019)

high jitter with optical is not an issue at all for chord dacs due to the DPLL (digital phase lock loop) which in simple terms brings the accuracy of timing of non-usb inputs in line with usb inputs (which are timed directly by the FPGA).


----------



## Lodwales81

Anybody have any input on the new singxer su6, £600 Is a bit of cash.


----------



## TomWoB (Jan 12, 2019)

The big question, when we are talking about different quality of input types, is ... at the end, what do we judge

the input quality of the DAC (Qutest) or
the output quality of the streaming device ?
I'm still wondering how big these differences "can be" (?). Let's say, we play the same "very good track"

from a sMS-200ultra via USB and

from an Allo DigiOne via Coax
and listen both with the Qutest. .. and let's assume, the cables and "the whole transport stuff" are good enough that the Qutest can "identity the bit-perfect signal" (after removing the protocol overhead) ... do we really hear a difference? The Qutest will anyway re-clock, oversample, ... this "bit-perfect signal". So Jitter e.g. is not an issue. OK, we have the RF noise, but

we have galvanic isolation on USB input of the Qutest and
we have galvanic isolation on Coax output of the DigiOne too
Maybe there is a difference with other DACs, but in case of a Qutest ... can there really be a "audible difference"? I don't know, I never had the possibility for a blind A-B test. As an electric engineer, I assume there is no difference in case of the Qutest could get the "bit perfect signal". We all copy daily a lot of of files with USB-Sticks or via Ethernet ... do we ever had the case that the copy of a file is different from the original ... NO (or very, very seldom in case of internet connection was lost).

Does the type of the S/PDIF transceiver on the source makes a difference? E.g. the DigiOne uses a WM8805 ... do we ever discuss about transceiver quality?

So ... I like my DigiOne and will stay with it ... I will not switch to a DigiOne Signature (for me only a try of Allo to make more money), because I assume with a DAC like the Qutest there will be no audible difference (yes, I read a lot of reviews that there is a difference). But if I check the layout of the "clean side" of both DigiOnes, I can't identify so much difference. OK, the DC-DC converter is gone, but there is a lot of RF filtering on the "clean-side" ... remember Allo reported this all the time before the Signature came out (!) ... and the sMS-200 uses DC-DC converters too ... so what !

So finally, what I want to say is: I believe that the Qutest is "more source independent" than other DACS !


----------



## Thenewguy007

musickid said:


> the accuracy of the oscillating crystals (responsible for timing and clocking the audio signal) inside alot of these cheap chinese ddc's leaves alot to be desired.



Too bad there are no external clocks that are in the realm of affordability.

$3,000-$4,000 for the Mutec & SOtM & starting at $1200 for the cheapest Cybershaft. That's more than any DDC, even with an added external power supply, on the market.


----------



## musickid

if the optical source is bit perfect then the source makes no difference. this was confirmed by the designer of qutest Rob. No audible difference at all. external mutec type clocking will harm chord dac operation. its also best to go direct from source to chord dac and avoid ddc's etc. i use my imac optical into mscaler. the key point is that the source must be bit perfect this is essential. also digital phase lock loop make chord dacs immune to jitter. it saves us a lot of money very good.


----------



## Arniesb

Any decrapifier color or ruin signal integrity... 1st of all some these like Jitterbug and signal converters slow down the signal, because these decrapifiers is like brakes to signal... There could be loss of energy in the process and 2nd every power supply there is add their own color to signal.


----------



## Clemmaster

You seem to know what you are talking about!


----------



## Sound Eq

can i ask please what settings you use in audirivana for mac
especially the sox or izotope advanced settings


----------



## Chester Rockwell

Arniesb said:


> Any decrapifier color or ruin signal integrity... 1st of all some these like Jitterbug and signal converters slow down the signal, because these decrapifiers is like brakes to signal... There could be loss of energy in the process and 2nd every power supply there is add their own color to signal.



I’ll admit I don’t have a great deal of knowledge in terms of the physics of electronics, but the above just doesn’t make any sense to me. Maybe you just understand this stuff better than I, but how do you slow down a signal? And in terms of losing energy, surely the signal is either received or it is not?

As I say, might just be a knowledge gap on my part.

I’m also not saying any of these devices do anything positive, I have no idea. It was more the science that confused me.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

TomWoB said:


> As an electric engineer, I assume there is no difference in case of the Qutest could get the "bit perfect signal". We all copy daily a lot of of files with USB-Sticks or via Ethernet ... do we ever had the case that the copy of a file is different from the original ... NO (or very, very seldom in case of internet connection was lost).


File transfer via USB and audio stream via USB are not the same thing. Here is some info about it:
https://darko.audio/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Have you ever watched a TV where the sharpness and colour settings have been turned up? Some people like their tellies like that but it is not accurate.
> 
> I was once made to sit through one of the Lord of the Rings movies at a friends house where he had a new huge TV with the sharpness turned up and all I could see was the horrible digital artifacts due to the artificial sharpening all the way through the movie. I do a lot of work with digital images and overuse of the PhotoShop unsharp mask (which actually applies sharpening) is easy to spot and is horrible.



Interesting comparison between photography and Photoshop and digital sound.

As a photographer I agree that  visible pixels can become  very disturbing when overdone.
The bigger the sensor and the more pixels you can cram in on that given space the  better.
I would guess almost the same applies with digtal bits and sampling rates?
The more bits you have and the higher  the sampling rate, the more information you actually capture.
I found it interesting to read Rob's mentioning  hearing basically the same acoustic information from a native 768khz test recording as from an M Scaler.
My guess is as in  HI RES full format Photography  ie 64 bits and the highest possible sampling rates may be what is actually  needed to capture all of the very complex information say a 100 men and women in  a large symphony orchestra  can deliver live.



Too often until getting an Mscaler, digital sound has been a bit like instead of seeing those pixels in badly done photoshop or with images from a low res small sensor camera with lots of noise, I have been HEARING those pixels as junk ,noise artifacts  and a general lack of transparency and resolution from most dacs and digital systems.

Qutest also suffers from such  disturbing "pixel effects" which tend to almost disappear or are lowered to a very notable degree with M Scaler connected.
But only with well made recordings.
M Scaler can not turn a bad recording into a good one, and Qutest on its own will struggle to do a really good one the  justice it deserves imho.. 
Cheers Controversial Christer  getting ready to re-calibrate things against the only true reference today again in a couple of hours.


----------



## Arniesb

Chester Rockwell said:


> I’ll admit I don’t have a great deal of knowledge in terms of the physics of electronics, but the above just doesn’t make any sense to me. Maybe you just understand this stuff better than I, but how do you slow down a signal? And in terms of losing energy, surely the signal is either received or it is not?
> 
> As I say, might just be a knowledge gap on my part.
> 
> I’m also not saying any of these devices do anything positive, I have no idea. It was more the science that confused me.


I  can give example.
Jitterbug make sound rolled off, lifelles all energy is sucked. This is when Signal integrity is compromised and timing is affected.
This mean slower, veiled, lifeless sound. Some people like reduced energy for some reason.
I have Ifi decrapifier too and this thing have something that fix signal integrity and it clearly shows... There is no slowing down or sucked out veiled sound.
Why do you think silver sound faster and leaner than copper? Because it is more conductive and signal reach faster gear thus presenting better timing.


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> I  can give example.
> Jitterbug make sound rolled off, lifelles all energy is sucked. This is when Signal integrity is compromised and timing is affected.
> This mean slower, veiled, lifeless sound. Some people like reduced energy for some reason.
> I have Ifi decrapifier too and this thing have something that fix signal integrity and it clearly shows... There is no slowing down or sucked out veiled sound.
> Why do you think silver sound faster and leaner than copper? Because it is more conductive and signal reach faster gear thus presenting better timing.



I cannot tell whether your tongue is firmly pressed in your cheek or not. I suspect not.

I have no idea what this thing is that you call Signal Integrity and which when compromised you say can cause lifeless sound, all energy is sucked (out). If the jitterbug caused this then it is much more likely that it had removed noise overlaid on the digital signal and what you were hearing was just the more accurate music. Your "_slower, veiled, lifeless sound_" is more likely to be the correct sound without noise. If the digital signal integrity is properly compromised then you will hear pops and crackles and not slightly different nuances to the music.


----------



## Joe-Siow

It has been a very interesting discussion on the various inputs and also USB enhancement devices

I took the afternoon to experiment with the Uptone ISO Regen in and out of my setup to see if I can hear any noticeable difference

With the SOTM SMS-200 connecting directly to Qutest via USB, I still enjoy my music; details is still forthcoming without sounding clinical, imaging is still pinpoint and overall sound quality is still very good.
With the ISO Regen plugged before the Qutest and playing the same few tracks, the music flowed with more ease and breathe better, sounding more natural with more air and space.

I've had the ISO Regen in my setup for the past 9 months and it is a keeper IMO. YMMV of course.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Also, a subject that has the horse almost flogged to death; PSU.

My upgraded Uptone LPS-1.2 replacement for a dead LPS-1 arrived yesterday. 
Just out of curiosity, I plugged it to the Qutest today.

Results: My my my. I might have to get another LPS-1.2 or even consider the JS-2 for the SMS-200 and ISO Regen, but let's not get ahead of myself first.


----------



## TomWoB (Jan 13, 2019)

Ragnar-BY said:


> File transfer via USB and audio stream via USB are not the same thing. Here is some info about it:
> https://darko.audio/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/



Yes, I know these points, summarized:

USB transmission is never perfect
in case of USB file transmission: the USB protocol allows to resend the failed packages, until file is 100% bit-perfect as the original
in case of audio transmission: yes, we can have a problem, because in case of a "continuous stream" we maybe don't have enough time to resend failed packages
Fine that's clear ... but why do we handle USB Audio still with a "continuous stream" ???
He .. we have 2019, we have already USB 3.1!

Here is my proposal for a "new USB Audio Protocol"

if we want to hear "a track", the streamer (which is not longer a "streamer") sends THE COMPLETE TRACK AT ONCE to the DAC (like a 100 % bit-perfect file transmission)

let's put 1 GB of RAM into the DAC that it can store the whole track in a buffer
USB 3.1 allows to transmit the "maybe few 100 MB of a classical track" in less then 1 second ... (USB 3.0 will be a little bit slower, so what)
USB 3.1 allows to transmit the track bit-perfect, because failed packages will be resend (like storing a file bit-perfect on an USB-Stick)
all our laptops run with SPS, but storing files bit-perfect on an USB-Stick is absolute no issue
so "streamers" with SPS, which send complete tracks, don't have a power supply problem

btw: the same will also work with Ethernet LAN connections
So again ... why we still "use continuous streams for USB audio" (or in general on digital side) ?

radio stations need streams, that's clear but
for all our music stored in files, I don't see longer any need for a continuos stream
let's send the complete file/track "at once" to the DAC (1GB RAM in the DAC should be cheaper than a 1000$ USB cable)

it will buffer the whole track
a lot of problems are gone (transmission problems, clocks, jitter, ...)
Best regards
Tom


----------



## nephilim32

TomWoB said:


> Yes, I know these points, summarized:
> 
> USB transmission is never perfect
> in case of USB file transmission: the USB protocol allows to resend the failed packages, until file is 100% bit-perfect as the original
> ...



This post is interesting and caught my eye in the world of usb/computer based audio . it makes me think of what my Cyrus CD i implores technology wise . The Cyrus engineering way uses an information or data reading system called servos technology .Servos tech gathers up all the data from a CD all at once to avoid sound anomalies like timing issues and to avoid using the dreaded ' error correction' like found in many conventional CD players and Apple I tunes import disc settings .
All I want to say is that with a "gathering of data all at once" philosophy really does lead to much better audio, especially with the timing of your music .
Makes a huge difference so I think your post here, Tom is great! 

I appreciate and love all kinds of audio set ups, but I am simply a purist.  
I'm a CD guy and I use my Qutest with my CD i to get the best results for me of course.


----------



## plsvn

TomWoB said:


> if we want to hear "a track", the streamer (which is not longer a "streamer") sends THE COMPLETE TRACK AT ONCE to the DAC (like a 100 % bit-perfect file transmission)
> 
> let's put 1 GB of RAM into the DAC that it can store the whole track in a buffer



the above is what every streamer (and most software players) already do or... streaming DACs are already there too


----------



## ATXKyle

nephilim32 said:


> This post is interesting and caught my eye in the world of usb/computer based audio . it makes me think of what my Cyrus CD i implores technology wise . The Cyrus engineering way uses an information or data reading system called servos technology .Servos tech gathers up all the data from a CD all at once to avoid sound anomalies like timing issues and to avoid using the dreaded ' error correction' like found in many conventional CD players and Apple I tunes import disc settings .
> All I want to say is that with a "gathering of data all at once" philosophy really does lead to much better audio, especially with the timing of your music .
> Makes a huge difference so I think your post here, Tom is great!
> 
> ...


+1 I’ve never understood why it isn’t done this way.


----------



## nephilim32

Joe-Siow said:


> Also, a subject that has the horse almost flogged to death; PSU.
> 
> My upgraded Uptone LPS-1.2 replacement for a dead LPS-1 arrived yesterday.
> Just out of curiosity, I plugged it to the Qutest today.
> ...



Hey . The PSU subject shouldn't die . I spent the better part of a week learning about LPS and SMPS and after careful deliberation I decided to take the plunge. I went with a Zero Zone 12V 6.5a LPS .
Got it off eBay and should arrive in 2 weeks from now . I have a pretty heavy duty and unique power supply for my CD player and it makes a difference sound wise, so I decided to try the same with my Qutest .why not? Can't hurt. 
Also . I will give my honest opinion weather this Zero Zone LPS makes a difference. I kinda doubt it will be substantial but given what I learned and read for the past week it really can't hurt to try .


----------



## TomWoB (Jan 13, 2019)

plsvn said:


> the above is what every streamer (and most software players) already do or... streaming DACs are already there too



Maybe the streamer reads the whole track "at once", but it doesn't send it "at once" to the DAC!

The streamer generates "a nearly continuous stream of data" to the DAC. More or less the data you hear "now or in a few seconds", so let's say somehow "live data". "Nearly continuous", because the USB protocol defines "fix data-blocks" which must be deliver at once ... but that's for sure not "the whole track" !


----------



## miketlse

TomWoB said:


> Yes, I know these points, summarized:
> 
> USB transmission is never perfect
> in case of USB file transmission: the USB protocol allows to resend the failed packages, until file is 100% bit-perfect as the original
> ...


If you want the dac to receive all the data for a track, before starting to convert the data from digital to analogue, you will need a gap between one track finishing and the next track starting.
Have you seen the number of posters who do complain, if they cannot achieve gapless playback of tracks?


----------



## GreenBow

Triode User said:


> Stereophile review of Qutest.
> 
> STEREOPHILE QUTEST



The output graph of frequency and amplitude was of interest to me. It shows that the Qutest has a flat response, which to me is ideal. It means you have a reference source, and any bass or treble emphasis is coming from other components. Better to have at least one component as reference, for me, anyway.

However it also demonstrates what quite a few of us in the Hugo2 thread have been saying all along. That the Hugo 2 has a perfectly flat response. While some others have been trying to imply that the Hugo 2 is bright. I think they were trying to troll Chord, and or, are in denial about the rest of their partnering equipment.

Also reviews of the Hugo 2 and Qutest are off the charts in complementary terms. It's a shame that a few headfiers seem to be trying to spoil it for the rest of people.

I personally find the Hugo 2 rich in timbre. Not as rich as the TT2 will be, but the Hugo 2 is a fine DAC. Right away from the minute I plugged put music through it, I knew it was right and said so. I was initially outfaced by detail, and knew it would take time to adjust. It took a month. Still however, just over one year later, the Hugo 2 still surprises me every time I use it.


----------



## TomWoB (Jan 13, 2019)

miketlse said:


> If you want the dac to receive all the data for a track, before starting to convert the data from digital to analogue, you will need a gap between one track finishing and the next track starting.
> Have you seen the number of posters who do complain, if they cannot achieve gapless playback of tracks?



For sure, there are some problems, which have to be solved! But I think this can be done, that's why I was talking about a "new USB Audio Protocol". It should allow

"an intelligent buffering" ... there is no reason why the next track shouldn't be in the buffer too

there is also somehow a "2-way communication" necessary, because the streamer should show the actual "playing time" 

"fast forward/backward", handled by the streamer has also to be solved (again ... 2-way connection)
playlist of the streamer has to be "in sync" with the buffer of the DAC

but these "control commands" are only a few bytes via USB and not so much "time critical" as an audio signal
Yes, there are a lot of "open points", but I think we should have this "sometimes in the future", because it will solve "so many problems we have with audiophile streaming" !


----------



## GreenBow

Arniesb said:


> I  can give example.
> Jitterbug make sound rolled off, lifelles all energy is sucked. This is when Signal integrity is compromised and timing is affected.
> This mean slower, veiled, lifeless sound. Some people like reduced energy for some reason.
> I have Ifi decrapifier too and this thing have something that fix signal integrity and it clearly shows... There is no slowing down or sucked out veiled sound.
> Why do you think silver sound faster and leaner than copper? Because it is more conductive and signal reach faster gear thus presenting better timing.



I had Jitterbug on my Mojo USB. Nothing like that you describe. I will keep mine forever. It made USB sound like the optical input, which is as it should be.

On Hugo 2 and I suspect on Qutest, you don't really need Jitterbug, because Rob put in RFI filtering. However when I replaced Mojo with Hugo 2 I left the Jitterbug on the line from PC. *NO WAY* is the sound dull or lifeless. It's fast, furious and alive, and yet still subtle and beautiful.


----------



## ray-dude (Jan 13, 2019)

TomWoB said:


> For sure, there are some problems, which have to be solved! But I think this can be done, that's why I was talking about a "new USB Audio Protocol". It should allow
> 
> "an intelligent buffering" ... there is no reason why the next track shouldn't be in the buffer too
> 
> ...



At the risk of going off topic, I've been experimenting a lot with these buffering concepts over the last several weeks.  I am using a low power Intel NUC and booting AudioLinux to ram.  It has replaced my MicroRendu 1.4 as my end point.

Over at the NUC forums on Computer Audiophile @austinpop reported that he was getting improved audio quality with SqueezeLite running as the end point (instead of Roon Bridge), but only when the buffer settings for the SL endpoint we increased.

Upon further investigation, we discovered that Roon (and LMS) both buffer the current track and the next track to SqueezeLite (when SL has large enough input buffers).  On a wired ethernet network, that basically means that everything is buffered up in memory on the end point in around a second.  For the balance of music playback, there is basically no ethernet traffic.  The impact on SQ is pretty significant (mScaler + DAVE for me).  When you reduce the buffer size on SL to the default, ethernet traffic is continuous during playback (same as with Roon Bridge), and SQ is pretty much equivalent to RoonBridge (ethernet traffic is continuous with Roon Bridge, but Roon Bridge does not have configurable buffers)

Clearly network traffic is impacting SQ on the end point (I suspect it is timing variation due to the system responding to ethernet interrupts, but I haven't done experiments to test that hypothesis yet).

SqueezeLite has a second buffer setting that controls the buffer between SL and the USB audio driver under linux.  I found that increasing this buffer also had a significant positive impact on SQ (presumably by having music data always buffered on the USB interface to the DAC in the fastest memory available).  Again, mote experiments to be done, but my prelim finding is that an end point running SqueezeLite with extremely large buffers basically is optimizing SQ, regardless of the tweaks upstream on the server side.

Net net from all this is that the USB interface is a very sensitive one, presumably to timing issues (these aren't RF issues...changing buffer sizes is clearly audible even though the electrical connections remain the same).  There is a LOT of lift to be had by optimizing the USB link. 

To the essence of this discussion, all the requirements being outlined for "next generation audio USB" are basically the functions that the end point streaming software provides (in this case, SqueezeLite...it is open source and the protocol for managing the various seek functions is well defined)

On my to do list is to leverage the optical in of HMS to see if buffering has an impact on the optical interface, and if so, how that compares to the USB interface.

As a caveat for those using Roon Server: Roon server does not play nice with LMS end points with large buffers.  There is frequent skipping, long delays when seeking, etc.  When you use LMS server, it handles all that perfectly.  For now, SqueezeLite is a test bed for me to see how buffers can be leverages to optimize the data stream to the DAC as much as possible.  When I'm done playing and doing critical listening, I switch back to Roon Bridge (reluctantly) so that the civilians in the house have something that "just works"

For those that want to play at home here is are my current SL settings:

/usr/bin/squeezelite -o front:CARD=SCALER,DEV=0 -b 4097152:97152 -d all=info -a 50000000:4 -c pcm -x -p 93

The -b parameter is the size of buffer between the server and the SL endpoint (in this case, ~4GB).  The -a parameter is the size of the buffer between SL and the DAC (~50MB)

An aside: NUC running SL in RAM with gratuitously large buffers are the most impressive digital playback I've had in my system. For those wanting to experiment with these buffer concepts, dive in and please share your findings!


----------



## Qute Beats

TomWoB said:


> Yes, I know these points, summarized:
> 
> USB transmission is never perfect
> in case of USB file transmission: the USB protocol allows to resend the failed packages, until file is 100% bit-perfect as the original
> ...


Was thinking along these lines as well the other day (send entire music file to DAC with CRC error correction), but then thought, does this approach not need a processor on the DAC with the required codec installed in order to decode and play the file?  FLAC codec is open source, so no problem there, but to decode other files licence fees need to be paid, thereby increasing cost of the DAC.  But sure would eliminate all the arguments over USB etc file transmission.


----------



## Qute Beats

ray-dude said:


> At the risk of going off topic, I've been experimenting a lot with these buffering concepts over the last several weeks.  I am using a low power Intel NUC and booting AudioLinux to ram.  It has replaced my MicroRendu 1.4 as my end point.
> 
> Over at the NUC forums on Computer Audiophile @austinpop reported that he was getting improved audio quality with SqueezeLite running as the end point (instead of Roon Bridge), but only when the buffer settings for the SL endpoint we increased.
> 
> ...


The media player I use (musicbee, free) has option to buffer whole track to PC RAM and I use this, as prevents continuous reading of HDD, it only adds the tiniest delay when starting playback.


----------



## Joe-Siow

nephilim32 said:


> Hey . The PSU subject shouldn't die . I spent the better part of a week learning about LPS and SMPS and after careful deliberation I decided to take the plunge. I went with a Zero Zone 12V 6.5a LPS .
> Got it off eBay and should arrive in 2 weeks from now . I have a pretty heavy duty and unique power supply for my CD player and it makes a difference sound wise, so I decided to try the same with my Qutest .why not? Can't hurt.
> Also . I will give my honest opinion weather this Zero Zone LPS makes a difference. I kinda doubt it will be substantial but given what I learned and read for the past week it really can't hurt to try .



Did you order the wrong voltage? Qutest takes 5V PSU. You might want to reach out to the seller if you can change the order.


----------



## nephilim32

Joe-Siow said:


> Did you order the wrong voltage? Qutest takes 5V PSU. You might want to reach out to the seller if you can change the order.



Most wall adaptors are not regulated, this means that the voltage they produce varies with load. For a "5V" adaptor with minimal load the voltage may be as high as 12 or 15 V.


----------



## Chester Rockwell

nephilim32 said:


> This post is interesting and caught my eye in the world of usb/computer based audio . it makes me think of what my Cyrus CD i implores technology wise . The Cyrus engineering way uses an information or data reading system called servos technology .Servos tech gathers up all the data from a CD all at once to avoid sound anomalies like timing issues and to avoid using the dreaded ' error correction' like found in many conventional CD players and Apple I tunes import disc settings .
> All I want to say is that with a "gathering of data all at once" philosophy really does lead to much better audio, especially with the timing of your music .
> Makes a huge difference so I think your post here, Tom is great!
> 
> ...



The Cyrus CD player may be gathering all the data at once, but if you’re connecting it to the Qutest, then surely it will still need to stream that data to the Qutest, where errors could still occur (in theory)?


----------



## nephilim32

Chester Rockwell said:


> The Cyrus CD player may be gathering all the data at once, but if you’re connecting it to the Qutest, then surely it will still need to stream that data to the Qutest, where errors could still occur (in theory)?



Stream? No. Gather yes The 1's and 0's. The cd player, since I bypass the internal dac, mainly acts as a time keeper and is the main keeper of all disc data read .the Qutest interpets whatever flow and gathering of info/data to do its d/A conversion from the cyrus's flow and interpetation .
Qutest doesn't take information...it receives .


----------



## Chester Rockwell

nephilim32 said:


> Stream? No. Gather yes The 1's and 0's. The cd player, since I bypass the internal dac, mainly acts as a time keeper and is the main keeper of all disc data read .the Qutest interpets whatever flow and gathering of info/data to do its d/A conversion from the cyrus's flow and interpetation .
> Qutest doesn't take information...it receives .



You’re right, ‘stream’ was a poor choice of words on my part.

Is my point not still valid though? Errors can still occur between the CD player and the Qutest. It’s just the same as any other source in that respect.


----------



## Triode User

nephilim32 said:


> Most wall adaptors are not regulated, this means that the voltage they produce varies with load. For a "5V" adaptor with minimal load the voltage may be as high as 12 or 15 V.



Having read your post I thought it might be interesting to go round the various wall adaptor power supplies I have littered through the home. At no load they were all within about 5% of stated output, even quite lowly spec ones. I would be worried 
if I had a 5v supply giving 12V or 15V and would put it straight on the bin.

Out of interest the Chord MScaler plug in power supply measured spot on 15V with no load (15v is its stated output).


----------



## Romi54

Does anyone use the IFI ipurifier 3 along with the Qutest?

What are your experiences?


----------



## Qute Beats

Romi54 said:


> Does anyone use the IFI ipurifier 3 along with the Qutest?
> 
> What are your experiences?


I use iFi purifier 2.  While this gave clearly audible benefit on previous DAC, its hard to hear any difference with Qutest.  Also recently bought iFi Silencer 3 to try, this goes at the PC end and I find it makes a small improvement.

edit t fix typo


----------



## Romi54

maybe the effect with the ipurifier3 is greater than with the 2 ....


----------



## HumanMedia (Jan 14, 2019)

nephilim32 said:


> Most wall adaptors are not regulated, this means that the voltage they produce varies with load. For a "5V" adaptor with minimal load the voltage may be as high as 12 or 15 V.



The current supplied should change with load but in a decent supply the voltage should not. Only poor quality unregulated supplies vary with load and this is frowned upon. You would never want an unregulated supply in an audio system as it will also kick out all sorts of garbage as well as go over-voltage with low current draws. If a low grade 5v supply went as high as 7v, this could slowly burn out the regulaters in the source equipment, or in the case of the Chord just blow its protection diode which is not covered by warranty. A crappy unregulated 12v supply into a 5v device will end in tears.

And most wall wart adapters are regulated, and only dirt cheap, really poor quality linear supplies are not regulated and these should avoided for unless you are charging a battery with them, or powering a small motor or lights but never electronics and definitely not a Qutest.


----------



## nephilim32

Chester Rockwell said:


> You’re right, ‘stream’ was a poor choice of words on my part.
> 
> Is my point not still valid though? Errors can still occur between the CD player and the Qutest. It’s just the same as any other source in that respect.


it would be if I were streaming, however I think not because I use a hard wired connection amongst my sources. 




Triode User said:


> Having read your post I thought it might be interesting to go round the various wall adaptor power supplies I have littered through the home. At no load they were all within about 5% of stated output, even quite lowly spec ones. I would be worried
> if I had a 5v supply giving 12V or 15V and would put it straight on the bin.
> 
> Out of interest the Chord MScaler plug in power supply measured spot on 15V with no load (15v is its stated output).



You know. I've been thinking about what you said and I've been doing more research into this matter and it seems the consensus is around 50/50 for having a 12v power supply to a 5v low current pulling device. Some have said you can have 7volt tolerance given my variables but I simply don't wanna risk it either. It isn't worth it . the possibility of the dialectric barrier protectors being fried is high. I imagine that the Qutest is a regulated supply at 5v 2a not the other way around because of what you said. I shouldn't believe everything I read in online electronics forums . should have consulted a professional right away . I've also tried to inform my seller from eBay my request for a 5v but the jerk wont get back to me through a response . ah well . worst case I ship it back . Don't wanna bother getting a voltage converter either . anyhow .thanks for checking your amps. You may have saved me a headache .



HumanMedia said:


> The current supplied should change with load but in a decent supply the voltage should not. Only poor quality unregulated supplies vary with load and this is frowned upon. You would never want an unregulated supply in an audio system as it will also kick out all sorts of garbage as well as go over-voltage with low current draws. If a low grade 5v supply went as high as 7v, this could slowly burn out the regulaters in the source equipment, or in the case of the Chord just blow its protection diode which is not covered by warranty. A crappy unregulated 12v supply into a 5v device will end in tears.
> 
> And most wall wart adapters are regulated, and only dirt cheap, really poor quality linear supplies are not regulated and these should avoided for unless you are charging a battery with them, or powering a small motor or lights but never electronics and definitely not a Qutest.



Ah yes. Exactly! Which is why I want to omit the cheap SMPS out of my sound chain .


----------



## nephilim32

HumanMedia said:


> The current supplied should change with load but in a decent supply the voltage should not. Only poor quality unregulated supplies vary with load and this is frowned upon. You would never want an unregulated supply in an audio system as it will also kick out all sorts of garbage as well as go over-voltage with low current draws. If a low grade 5v supply went as high as 7v, this could slowly burn out the regulaters in the source equipment, or in the case of the Chord just blow its protection diode which is not covered by warranty. A crappy unregulated 12v supply into a 5v device will end in tears.
> 
> And most wall wart adapters are regulated, and only dirt cheap, really poor quality linear supplies are not regulated and these should avoided for unless you are charging a battery with them, or powering a small motor or lights but never electronics and definitely not a Qutest.



I also agree with you .I find the risk is just too high .
I am getting a 5V .
I read that there are tolerances but I don't wanna risk it . I think it will end in tears. Lol


----------



## musickid

and void the warranty its madness. the supplied psu came about after extensive trial and error.


----------



## Macaron

Qute Beats said:


> I use iFi purifier 2.  While this gave clearly audible benefit on previous DAC, its hard to hear any difference with Qutest.  Also recently bought iFi Silencer 3 to try, this goes at the PC end and I find it makes a small improvement.
> 
> edit t fix typo




Hi, I used before iPurifier 2, the change was audible (more depth) but I wouldn't advice this device (they where not only gains on my side with it), I switched after to a Allo Usbridge, the result is far better than the iPurifier 2 (didn't tried the v3).


----------



## OctavianH

That Allo Usbridge seems to have more functions one might not need like streaming. What I would be interested is a simple filter/regenerator for the USB signal and nothing more which works with Qutest.


----------



## michaelvv

Ragnar-BY said:


> @Rob Watts thank you for the info. Very interesting, as always.
> 
> Can you help me with DSD-playback, please?
> I`m using Qutest via USB from MacBook Pro. Music in DSD256 from nativedsd.com. There are no problems with PCM hi-res, including DXD (24/352,8). Only with DSD. I`ve tried three different players: latest Audirvana, Colibri and Bitperfect with it`s DSD Master add-on.
> ...



Hi Ragnay-BY

These issues with DSD playback also exists on Linux OS with both 2Qute and Hugo2 DAC's. I have tried virtual everything with both ARM and Intel based setup and a tons of different Linux kernels.
Please take a look on this thread on diyaudio.com : https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pc-based/310578-chord-2qute-dop-challenge.html

Right now I'm running gentooplayer : https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/55235-gentooplayer/

This can run entirely in ram so it's only depended on CPU ( Intel i5-7600T ) RAM ( 8GB ) and a USB cable to my Chord 2Qute DAC.

PS! There is a issue with seeing the images on diyaudio.com as my ISP has messed with my router 

Best Michael.


----------



## bcoryh

I am a long-time lurker - thank you for all of the great info - but I have never posted. Time to jump in!

I recently purchased a Qutest and am considering a new amp that has only balanced inputs. My current interconnects are Nordost Heimdall IIs with RCAs. The amp designer said that the amp works "perfectly with RCA to XLR adapters or cables ... and splits the phase automatically and with no loss."

I've looked online and through the forums but I cannot find what seems to be a quality RCA to XLR adaptor. I assume they exist and I am just missing them. Are there any such adapters that Qutest users recommend? 

My apologies if this already has been addressed.

Thanks so much. 

Cory H.


----------



## AndrewOld (Jan 16, 2019)

bcoryh said:


> I am a long-time lurker - thank you for all of the great info - but I have never posted. Time to jump in!
> 
> I recently purchased a Qutest and am considering a new amp that has only balanced inputs. My current interconnects are Nordost Heimdall IIs with RCAs. The amp designer said that the amp works "perfectly with RCA to XLR adapters or cables ... and splits the phase automatically and with no loss."
> 
> ...



Just make, or get someone to make, RCA to XLR leads for you. That way you avoid an adaptor. Bluejeanscable.com (amongs others) will make such leads for you, though you need to write to them with the correct pin out. It should be in the amp manual, or the manufacturer should be able to tell you. It is often hot to pin 2, return to pin 3, ground to pin 1 at the XLR end, and hot to the center pin of the RCA and return and ground to the ground of the RCA.


----------



## nick77

Cardas XLR adapters are the go to for audiophile.


----------



## bcoryh

AndrewOld said:


> Just make, or get someone to make, RCA to XLR leads for you. That way you avoid an adaptor. Bluejeanscable.com (amongs others) will make such leads for you, though you need to write to them with the correct pin out. It should be in the amp manual, or the manufacturer should be able to tell you. It is often hot to pin 2, return to pin 3, ground to pin 1 at the XLR end, and hot to the center pin of the RCA and return and ground to the ground of the RCA.



Thank you. New cables certainly are one option.



nick77 said:


> Cardas XLR adapters are the go to for audiophile.



Thank you; I just found them online. Another member recommended Neutriks, which also look promising. Great suggestions - just what I needed. Thanks everyone.


----------



## AndrewOld

bcoryh said:


> Thank you. New cables certainly are one option.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you; I just found them online. Another member recommended Neutriks, which also look promising. Great suggestions - just what I needed. Thanks everyone.



If you want to go down the adapter route, you can get excellent pro-quality adapters from Canford Audio for a fifth of the price of the Cardas ones.

https://www.canford.co.uk/XLR-ADAPTERS


----------



## Triode User

AndrewOld said:


> If you want to go down the adapter route, you can get excellent pro-quality adapters from Canford Audio for a fifth of the price of the Cardas ones.
> 
> https://www.canford.co.uk/XLR-ADAPTERS



I also recommend Canford. They are a first class supplier.


----------



## bcoryh

Triode User said:


> I also recommend Canford. They are a first class supplier.


Awesome. Thank you!


----------



## ea666 (Jan 17, 2019)

Hello all,

newbie to the DAC game and purchased the Qutest on a whim based on all the positive feedback from the majority.

Having set up the DAC, I'm not "wowed" by it so far.

Does this DAC need some time to run in?

My system is built up of the following...

Cyrus CDt, Pre2DAC QX, Stereo 200 & PSX-R2
Bluesound Node 2i
Monitor Audio Platinum PL200 II


----------



## bcoryh

ea666 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> newbie to the DAC game and purchased the Qutest on a whim based on all the positive feedback from the majority.
> 
> ...


This is a big can of worms with many schools of thought. Without diving into them all, at very least, I find it's helpful to reserve judgment - and critical analysis - until my ear and brain have had some time to adjust. I don't have a formula for how long that adjustment should take, but for me, it's measured in weeks or months. YMMV.

For what it's worth, my Qutest pairs wonderfully with my ALO Studio Six, Abyss Diana Phis, and Nordost Heimdall II cables and power cords.


----------



## ea666

bcoryh said:


> This is a big can of worms with many schools of thought. Without diving into them all, at very least, I find it's helpful to reserve judgment - and critical analysis - until my ear and brain have had some time to adjust. I don't have a formula for how long that adjustment should take, but for me, it's measured in weeks or months. YMMV.
> 
> For what it's worth, my Qutest pairs wonderfully with my ALO Studio Six, Abyss Diana Phis, and Nordost Heimdall II cables and power cords.



Fair point. Thanks.


----------



## nephilim32

ea666 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> newbie to the DAC game and purchased the Qutest on a whim based on all the positive feedback from the majority.
> 
> ...



Hi . You have a pretty good DAC already with the pre 2. Cyrus makes great 32 multi-bit dacs, however given your amp try setting your Qutest to 3V RMS .

Lastly. I found upon proper burn it time the qutest's mid range cleaned up a lot. At the start things were a bit glaring with the upper miss but man oh man they smooth out. 
Just be patient .you'll see its value with in your sound chain soon enough. 

Enjoy.


----------



## ea666

nephilim32 said:


> Hi . You have a pretty good DAC already with the pre 2. Cyrus makes great 32 multi-bit dacs, however given your amp try setting your Qutest to 3V RMS .
> 
> Lastly. I found upon proper burn it time the qutest's mid range cleaned up a lot. At the start things were a bit glaring with the upper miss but man oh man they smooth out.
> Just be patient .you'll see its value with in your sound chain soon enough.
> ...



Thanks, will give 3V a go.


----------



## nephilim32

ea666 said:


> Thanks, will give 3V a go.



I think you'll love it right off the bat .I did. I use Cyrus gear as well, but you need a really elite amp to pair with their CD players. The Qutest will bridge that gap . You can use a modest amp and the Qutest usually set at 3V gives you a ton of power and volume flexibility.


----------



## jwbrent

ea666 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> newbie to the DAC game and purchased the Qutest on a whim based on all the positive feedback from the majority.
> 
> ...



If the sound is somewhat dry and brittle even using the warmer filters, then yes, in my view, the Qutest needs a couple hundred hours of play time, at least, before this character improves. My empirical experience is that digital gear needs burn-in, and the better the gear, the longer it takes.

I’m not a believer in the notion that one’s ears adjust to the initial sound.

I own a Qutest.


----------



## Christer (Jan 17, 2019)

musickid said:


> and void the warranty its madness. the supplied psu came about after extensive trial and error.


Hello musickid.
Are you referring to Qutest or M Scaler with this statement ? Or both?
All I can say on this subject so far since "switching" from SPU to battery powered LPS since about a month is that every time I run out of battery in mid track of what I happen to be listening to when it happens and have to plug in the supplied one ,the difference between the battery powered LPS and the supplied SPU with  Qutest but  M Scaler connected with the supplied unit, at least where I am in Asian countries, is not subtle but  quite immediately audible to me with most of my well recorded hi res mainly western classical acoustic music.
And the differences  I hear are not in favour of the  unit supplied with my Qutest.
The battery powered one sounds calmer/cleaner and purer,and simply better than the supplied one and I am happy I have got it because to me it takes Q/HMS one notch higher and closer to the real reference with my acoustic music.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Triode User

jwbrent said:


> If the sound is somewhat dry and brittle even using the warmer filters, then yes, in my view, the Qutest needs a couple hundred hours of play time, at least, before this character improves. My empirical experience is that digital gear needs burn-in, and the better the gear, the longer it takes.
> 
> I’m not a believer in the notion that one’s ears adjust to the initial sound.
> 
> I own a Qutest.



The counter view is that I recollect Rob Watts saying about another of his DACs that he had compared one straight off the production line with one that he had used a lot and he could tell no difference between them.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Triode User said:


> The counter view is that I recollect Rob Watts saying about another of his DACs that he had compared one straight off the production line with one that he had used a lot and he could tell no difference between them.


This and I also heard no difference at all.Maybe at the first hour but not really certain.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Christer said:


> Hello musickid.
> Are you referring to Qutest or M Scaler with this statement ? Or both?
> All I can say on this subject so far since "switching" from SPU to battery powered LPS since about a month is that every time I run out of battery in mid track of what I happen to be listening to when it happens and have to plug in the supplied one ,the difference between the battery powered LPS and the supplied SPU with  Qutest but  M Scaler connected with the supplied unit, at least where I am in Asian countries, is not subtle but  quite immediately audible to me with most of my well recorded hi res mainly western classical acoustic music.
> And the differences  I hear are not in favour of the  unit supplied with my Qutest.
> ...



As far as I'm concerned, there is no restriction on Chord's part on the use of PSU for Qutest. However they made it very clear on the manual of the Hugo M Scaler that warranty will be voided should any other PSU other than the supplied one be used.


----------



## jwbrent

Triode User said:


> The counter view is that I recollect Rob Watts saying about another of his DACs that he had compared one straight off the production line with one that he had used a lot and he could tell no difference between them.



Yes, I recall that post about the Mojo. Whether he would say the same about the Qutest is unknown, but as mentioned, the better the DAC, the better the componentry inside, the more time needed for the sound to settle. In my view.


----------



## ea666

nephilim32 said:


> I think you'll love it right off the bat .I did. I use Cyrus gear as well, but you need a really elite amp to pair with their CD players. The Qutest will bridge that gap . You can use a modest amp and the Qutest usually set at 3V gives you a ton of power and volume flexibility.



I've changed the default from 1V trailed 3V and settled on 2V, which gives the same volume control prior to setting the Qutest.  Changing to 2V injected some volume into my set up and now to allow for time to hopefully let the Qutest bring praise to my ears too


----------



## Triode User

jwbrent said:


> Yes, I recall that post about the Mojo. Whether he would say the same about the Qutest is unknown, but as mentioned, the better the DAC, the better the componentry inside, the more time needed for the sound to settle. In my view.



Sure, of course it is all YMMV and IMO but I have not noticed any change in my Dave from the day that I turned it on 2 years ago until now (I very rarely turn it off or put it in standby).


----------



## dc71 (Jan 18, 2019)

jwbrent said:


> Yes, I recall that post about the Mojo. Whether he would say the same about the Qutest is unknown, but as mentioned, the better the DAC, the better the componentry inside, the more time needed for the sound to settle. In my view.



For me, I felt like Qutest took a month or so of daily use to come on song and sound what I perceive as fully natural. Although sounding good from the first few hours, the perception/illusion of real-sounding voices and instruments improved for me over the first 4-5 weeks.

M-scaler is above my price range, but from what I hear in my system, using the upsampling to 24-384 in my Lumin U1 mini and feeding Qutest over a Curious USB cable, there seems to be value in upsampling to the max I can within my setup.


----------



## nephilim32

ea666 said:


> I've changed the default from 1V trailed 3V and settled on 2V, which gives the same volume control prior to setting the Qutest.  Changing to 2V injected some volume into my set up and now to allow for time to hopefully let the Qutest bring praise to my ears too



Its a bit of trail and error, so the bit of switching involves finding the best match for your amps sensitivity output .
I am not sure what headphones you use, but I imagine for those who have orca fat impedance headphones like some Bayerdynamics or the purly resistive LCD 4's (600ohms planar) while using a modest amp will have to use the 3V setting . I have the Burson Soloist and use the HD 800's with a Cyrus transport and I need the 3V setting big time. 
Anyhow I found that the 1 to 3V RMS setting is one of the Qutest's biggest values to me option wise . saved me from having to buy another amp .


----------



## nephilim32

Christer said:


> Hello musickid.
> Are you referring to Qutest or M Scaler with this statement ? Or both?
> All I can say on this subject so far since "switching" from SPU to battery powered LPS since about a month is that every time I run out of battery in mid track of what I happen to be listening to when it happens and have to plug in the supplied one ,the difference between the battery powered LPS and the supplied SPU with  Qutest but  M Scaler connected with the supplied unit, at least where I am in Asian countries, is not subtle but  quite immediately audible to me with most of my well recorded hi res mainly western classical acoustic music.
> And the differences  I hear are not in favour of the  unit supplied with my Qutest.
> ...



This was impart to the voltage output matching of the Qutest and your LPS. 
You have a possible risk running say a 12V or 15V power supply into a 5v unit. 
You literally fry either the power supply or the dac itself depending on which is a regulated dc voltage output .
Anyhow .Battery supplied LPS or Isolation transformers like say from Torus power are the best! They make a difference just as you said .


----------



## 486930

I found the V output to be absolutely critical to make the Qutest sound good. I use it with a Croft Pre/Power combo and with 2V and 3V it sounded metallic and glaring. With 1V it sounds full and fat while also being more transparent. 

A question: I have tried two streamers, Innuos Zen Mini mk3 and Stream Box S2 Ultra. Innuos is the better one, and they both sound somewhat better than an iPad or laptop wired to the Qutest. I’ve found, however, that I kind of prefer the freedom of a wired laptop/iPad because I can use Tidal’s own app and likewise with BandCamp, Soundcloud, etc. So here’s the question: how do I maximise the sound from a wired laptop or iPad without a secoundary device that requires power? Is something like a fancy usb cable enough? Budget would be 500$

Thanks


----------



## miketlse

Malmbak said:


> I found the V output to be absolutely critical to make the Qutest sound good. I use it with a Croft Pre/Power combo and with 2V and 3V it sounded metallic and glaring. With 1V it sounds full and fat while also being more transparent.
> 
> A question: I have tried two streamers, Innuos Zen Mini mk3 and Stream Box S2 Ultra. Innuos is the better one, and they both sound somewhat better than an iPad or laptop wired to the Qutest. I’ve found, however, that I kind of prefer the freedom of a wired laptop/iPad because I can use Tidal’s own app and likewise with BandCamp, Soundcloud, etc. So here’s the question: how do I maximise the sound from a wired laptop or iPad without a secoundary device that requires power? Is something like a fancy usb cable enough? Budget would be 500$
> 
> Thanks


USB cables can act like aerials, and pick up RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) from all the WiFi, phones, TVs etc, that fill today's homes.
Before you spend a lot of money on a secondary device, try adding one or more ferrite cores to your USB cable, near the end with the plug that feeds the Qutest.
Here are some examples, but there are various brands.
They are sized according to the diameter of the cable that they will fit, so be careful to use the correct size of ferrite.
They are cheap enough to experiment with, so the worst case scenario is that you hear no benefit, but haven't spent a fortune.
Many Mojo owners found that ferrites helped remove RFI, and improved the Mojo sound quality - so other Chord owners now find it worth experimenting with ferrites as well.


----------



## jwbrent

Malmbak said:


> I found the V output to be absolutely critical to make the Qutest sound good. I use it with a Croft Pre/Power combo and with 2V and 3V it sounded metallic and glaring. With 1V it sounds full and fat while also being more transparent.
> 
> A question: I have tried two streamers, Innuos Zen Mini mk3 and Stream Box S2 Ultra. Innuos is the better one, and they both sound somewhat better than an iPad or laptop wired to the Qutest. I’ve found, however, that I kind of prefer the freedom of a wired laptop/iPad because I can use Tidal’s own app and likewise with BandCamp, Soundcloud, etc. So here’s the question: how do I maximise the sound from a wired laptop or iPad without a secoundary device that requires power? Is something like a fancy usb cable enough? Budget would be 500$
> 
> Thanks



Since you have an iPad, I presume you have a MacBook of some sort. I strongly recommend Audirvana + as your file playing software. It’s around $75 and it makes a nice performance difference with lots of functionality. If you have a Windows/Linux based laptop, I would research software music players.


----------



## AlexB73

Malmbak said:


> I found the V output to be absolutely critical to make th8e Qutest sound good. I use it with a Croft Pre/Power combo and with 2V and 3V it sounded metallic and glaring. With 1V it sounds full and fat while also being more transparent.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks


He he.
For 3volt rms output you need power supply voltage around 9 volt. For 2volt rms you need power supply ~6volt. And for 1 volt you need only 3 volt.
So it is obviously Qutest uses internal switched powers supply to boost external 5 volt power supply voltage. Only 1 volt rms output doesn't need voltage boost.


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Jan 19, 2019)

Malmbak said:


> I found the V output to be absolutely critical to make the Qutest sound good. I use it with a Croft Pre/Power combo and with 2V and 3V it sounded metallic and glaring. With 1V it sounds full and fat while also being more transparent.
> 
> A question: I have tried two streamers, Innuos Zen Mini mk3 and Stream Box S2 Ultra. Innuos is the better one, and they both sound somewhat better than an iPad or laptop wired to the Qutest. I’ve found, however, that I kind of prefer the freedom of a wired laptop/iPad because I can use Tidal’s own app and likewise with BandCamp, Soundcloud, etc. So here’s the question: how do I maximise the sound from a wired laptop or iPad without a secoundary device that requires power? Is something like a fancy usb cable enough? Budget would be 500$
> 
> Thanks



My advise re usb cable; Get a Supra 2.0 USB cable, which comes highly recommend by quite a few people and have a great review by Hi-fi Choice, no need to spend more in my view and try some ferrites as per a previous post. The ferrites may not be needed as Qutest is galvanically isolated but is worth a try... Just my suggestions!


----------



## 486930

Thanks guys. What about the Curious Cable?


----------



## Triode User

Paul Bjernklo said:


> My advise re usb cable; Get a Supra 2.0 USB cable, which comes highly recommend by quite a few people and have a great review by Hi-fi Choice, no need to spend more in my view and try some ferrites as per a previous post. The ferrites may not be needed as Qutest is galvanically isolated but is worth a try... Just my suggestions!



I use the Supra 2.0 and have compared it to some quite exotic and expensive cables and I decided that the supra was just as good.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

AlexB73 said:


> He he.
> For 3volt rms output you need power supply voltage around 9 volt. For 2volt rms you need power supply ~6volt. And for 1 volt you need only 3 volt.
> So it is obviously Qutest uses internal switched powers supply to boost external 5 volt power supply voltage. Only 1 volt rms output doesn't need voltage boost.


Never thought about that. I was always using 3V mode, because at higher voltage you should have less influence from interconnects (at least in theory). I will try to listen to 1V mode.


----------



## AlexB73

Nobody knows how output of Qutest is designed except Rob Watts.
What I sad, if you need to make 2 or 3 volt rms output from 5 volt power you have to use switched DC-DC converter Flyback or Boost.
But it can be good implemented.
I tried all these option in my system.
 3 volt output sounds most open and dynamic. 2 volt output sounds more cleaner and focused in high frequencies. 1 volt output sounds the worst.


----------



## musickid

for christer AFAIK portable power banks and the supplied psu are ok everything else is at the owners own risk. with no real difference in sq between either of the first 2 i would stick to the tested supplied psu. each to their own.


----------



## Christer (Jan 20, 2019)

musickid said:


> for christer AFAIK portable power banks and the supplied psu are ok everything else is at the owners own risk. with no real difference in sq between either of the first 2 i would stick to the tested supplied psu. each to their own.



Hello again musickid.
Yes I am fully  aware of the "owners own risk" thing with M Scaler and have not tried anything else than the supplied power supply with it although I know Rob himself  even recommended and uses a  specific powerbank which I could not buy and which  seems unavailable .
But the fact remains that to my ears and with my references direct to the live sound in the hall in quite a few cases the battery powered  LPS I am using sounds better with Qutest/M Scaler than the switching PSU that came with my Qutest,
This is also something that was  mentioned in one review of Qutest.The supplied PSU  may not be as good as the dac itself is capable of delivering, and I can quite easily hear the difference between the two. And going back to the supplied one is only something I do when the battery powered one runs out of battery power.
So in that case I can say that there is actually  a real difference.
As you say each to their own.
Whether M Scaler would  also benefit from a battery powered LPS is something that I would like to know but I don't want to run the risk of losing warranty to try out for myself.It is simply too damned expensive for me to run such a risk, But  I know that even with Chord's top dac DAVE some users/owners have exchanged the powersupply and at least according to them with better SQ results than the orginal one.
And if I understand things correctly most powerbanks are also switching power units and although practical for me under some circumstances, may not actually be better SQ wise.
According to the review in question and some  other sources switching power supplies can be prone to sending noise back into the dac. But well isolated battery power LPS with the most silent batteries and well made USB isolation correct voltage setting treatment does not according to that school. I know Rob prefers using  switching PSUs  in his DACs but that does not completely rule out that there may be benefits to be gained from trying other ways of powering his DACs.
Dirty  mains power can be  a problem in many places  and some companies go a long way to fight it.
My own 900 watts per  channel stereo amp back home has a separate power supply unit weighing 50 lbs, to mention just one way of dealing with dirty power.
I have even got a headphone amp from the same company that can be used with and without a separate power supply unit. And the difference between the two is not subtle.
While travelling this winter I am using a battery powered headphone amp and my laptop running on battery and also Qutest on battery power.
The fewer units that are connected to the mains the better the SQ in my experience.
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## musickid (Jan 20, 2019)

Hello Christer,

when you say battery powered LPS is that linear power supply? the only okay battery power i know of comes in the shape of     https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/263266765245

i'm slightly confused as 1) i didn't know LPS can be battery powered and 2) it was clearly stated LPS power voids the warranty. the only two ok power sources are the supplied psu and the eg in the link.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

AlexB73 said:


> Nobody knows how output of Qutest is designed except Rob Watts.
> What I sad, if you need to make 2 or 3 volt rms output from 5 volt power you have to use switched DC-DC converter Flyback or Boost.
> But it can be good implemented.
> I tried all these option in my system.
> 3 volt output sounds most open and dynamic. 2 volt output sounds more cleaner and focused in high frequencies. 1 volt output sounds the worst.


Last night I was listening in 1V mode. At the first glance 1V sounds slightly better and slightly darker than 3V. Initially I also thought that 3V mode is more dynamic, but after more listening, I`ve realized that is only subjective impression because of darker sound. Maybe it is because of my amp, but Violectric V200 can take even more than 3V RMS. Anyway, I love Qutest sound in all modes, but it seems 1V might work better for my setup. Also it gives additional headroom for volume control with sensitive cans, like my Fostex TH-900.

@Rob Watts it would be great if you can tell us how different voltages of Qutest work. Is it true, that 1V mode mean less pressure on internal PSU and may result in better SQ?


----------



## TomWoB

Ragnar-BY said:


> @Rob Watts it would be great if you can tell us how different voltages of Qutest work. Is it true, that 1V mode mean less pressure on internal PSU and may result in better SQ?



I think Rob answered already:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...-official-thread.869417/page-13#post-13972713


----------



## Skampmeister

If anyone here hasn’t done so already, you HAVE to pair the Qutest with an M-Scaler. It’s not ever a question , the difference you can never unhear. 

It’s revolutionary, and I’m not tying to be dramatic. 

Beg

Steal

Borrow


----------



## Ragnar-BY

TomWoB said:


> I think Rob answered already:
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...-official-thread.869417/page-13#post-13972713


I don`t think this is the answer to my question. Digital, or analog it is still different voltage that requires additional power, isn`t it?


----------



## AlexB73

If 1,2,3 volt ouput setup is done by digital volume control, then interal power supply always works in the same mode with internal voltage more than 9 volt.


----------



## eddie0817

Hi

I manage to pair Qutest with different power supplier, I would say it definitely affect the sound quality, when I pair with the cheap one from Taobao, price around 80 USD.
the dynamic and resolution is better compare to original PSU, but original one is more neutral with less detail also.

And then I pair with the PLiXiR Balanced DC Power Supplies(BCD) 5V 2A, Sound quality improved even significantly, compare to the Taobao one, it gives more solid sound,
the background is very clean and dark with good dynamic,Taobao one treble a bit too sharp.

Compare to the power bank, I would say it is also clean, but the dynamic and  resolution are not as PLiXiR, I think the power supply is worth investing.


----------



## maxh22

eddie0817 said:


> Hi
> 
> I manage to pair Qutest with different power supplier, I would say it definitely affect the sound quality, when I pair with the cheap one from Taobao, price around 80 USD.
> the dynamic and resolution is better compare to original PSU, but original one is more neutral with less detail also.
> ...



You can also roll different power banks until you get the sound you desire. Each power bank sounds slightly different from the next if you do some listening tests, always go with the warmest smoothest sounding one and your ears will be rewarded in the long term


----------



## Rob Watts

Ragnar-BY said:


> I don`t think this is the answer to my question. Digital, or analog it is still different voltage that requires additional power, isn`t it?



The adjustment in level is done digitally, and this is more transparent than doing it with analogue means, as my truncation stage is aggressively noise shaped to ensure -400dB digital domain signal accuracy. Note that all the OP levels go through the same stage - the coefficient value is merely adjusted.

As to OP voltage, Qutest is innately capable of much more OP voltage than 3v, so there is no significant difference in internal operation or distortion. If you are hearing differences, for sure it's down to the ancillary gear connected to Qutest; and each piece will have different optimum values. If you are unsure, then just set it to 2v, the regular CD/DAC output voltage.


----------



## x RELIC x

Rob Watts said:


> If you are hearing differences, for sure it's down to the ancillary gear connected to Qutest; and each piece will have different optimum values.



Or differences can be thought to be perceived due to not volume matching when comparing, which is often overlooked or not done accurately.


----------



## Lodwales81

After a little help, having trouble using quobuz with my qutest via USB. Quobuz just struggles to connect with both asio and wasabi on both my mac and Windows pc. For the time being I have switched back to Tidal masters but not a massive fan although I do like the Roon integration. I have contacted Quobuz support but nothing back, and help would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Triode User

Lodwales81 said:


> After a little help, having trouble using quobuz with my qutest via USB. Quobuz just struggles to connect with both asio and wasabi on both my mac and Windows pc. For the time being I have switched back to Tidal masters but not a massive fan although I do like the Roon integration. I have contacted Quobuz support but nothing back, and help would be greatly appreciated.



As of today Qobuz is integrated in Roon 1.6 which is released today.


----------



## plsvn

Triode User said:


> As of today Qobuz is integrated in Roon 1.6 which is released today.


----------



## Lodwales81

Triode User said:


> As of today Qobuz is integrated in Roon 1.6 which is released today.


----------



## jbarrentine (Jan 24, 2019)

screw it. bought a qutest.


----------



## nephilim32

eddie0817 said:


> Hi
> 
> I manage to pair Qutest with different power supplier, I would say it definitely affect the sound quality, when I pair with the cheap one from Taobao, price around 80 USD.
> the dynamic and resolution is better compare to original PSU, but original one is more neutral with less detail also.
> ...



This is amazing, but for the amount of money PliXir charges for their LPS on its own I would have looked into Isolation Transformers. 
Torus Power makes the best I think .
The Tot Mini is their budget priced unit and it is amazing. 
A cost no object I think Isolation Transformers are the best tech for mains power conditioning. 
Still . I think you made a cool purchase and the Plixir stack combo for balanced conditioning is a pretty cool concept and design .


----------



## nephilim32

These are great . You can keep your stock SMPS and just run it though this .
You'll never need anything more . expensive but I'd have to say it is worth it .clean power really makes a difference and I have come full circle to realize this.


----------



## nephilim32

Skampmeister said:


> If anyone here hasn’t done so already, you HAVE to pair the Qutest with an M-Scaler. It’s not ever a question , the difference you can never unhear.
> 
> It’s revolutionary, and I’m not tying to be dramatic.
> 
> ...



I love your attitude and enthusiasm . I am so anxious to try it .
However, I have some reserves to buy the M scaler cause I am hoping for a cheaper model .some like I do on here feel the HMS carries a lot of bells and whistles and for 6500$ CAN I gotta wait and hope there will be a smaller and more affordable unit to stack with the Qutest. I think it can be done, but in the meantime I am gonna go to my local dealer at the beginning of next month and audition the HMS with the Qutest .
I am very excited and also congrats on getting the HMS!


----------



## jwbrent

nephilim32 said:


> I love your attitude and enthusiasm . I am so anxious to try it .
> However, I have some reserves to buy the M scaler cause I am hoping for a cheaper model .some like I do on here feel the HMS carries a lot of bells and whistles and for 6500$ CAN I gotta wait and hope there will be a smaller and more affordable unit to stack with the Qutest. I think it can be done, but in the meantime I am gonna go to my local dealer at the beginning of next month and audition the HMS with the Qutest .
> I am very excited and also congrats on getting the HMS!



I’m in the same boat, plus the form factor doesn’t match the Qutest. We can only hope that Chord can find a way to bring this technology in a simplified version with a chassis that matches the Qutest ... for less money!

Rob has commented earlier about his doubts on this due to the cost of FPGA chips now and in the future ...


----------



## eddie0817

Totally agree with that, so at the same time I brought the PLIXIR BAC 150 power conditioning also, it is a balanced power supplier.

BAC 150 + BDC with Qutest , would say the effects are double 

https://flic.kr/p/2dbA96L





nephilim32 said:


> This is amazing, but for the amount of money PliXir charges for their LPS on its own I would have looked into Isolation Transformers.
> Torus Power makes the best I think .
> The Tot Mini is their budget priced unit and it is amazing.
> A cost no object I think Isolation Transformers are the best tech for mains power conditioning.
> Still . I think you made a cool purchase and the Plixir stack combo for balanced conditioning is a pretty cool concept and design .


----------



## Windseeker

I got my Qutest last November.  After roughly sixty days of (literally) daily use, I thought maybe it's worthwhile to post a short note of appreciation...


I decided to go for it due to considerable positive coverages and user responses, and its highly attractive price was also a big plus.

I was aiming for a DAC that can play into the strengths of STAX SR-009, my main workhorse. As Chord doesn't (yet) offer DACs capable to drive electrostats directly, Qutest (as opposed to Hugo 2, for example) seemed to make sense for my use case (I'm using STAX SRM-727 II as energizer).

I've been using Luxman DA-250 and good old Grace Design m902 (plus DACs that came w/ players by Esoteric / Pioneer), but Qutest was electrifying from day 1:

- Very transparent, crystal clear sound image
- Highly musical and intimate presentation (as opposed to being too analytical and sounding aloof)
- Fundamentally sound performance with consistently low noise / distortion
- Virtually no listening fatigues.  On weekends, I can (and often do) listen continuously for hours


This was my first purchase of a Chord product, and I'm glad I made the leap. 
So, congrats and many thanks for Mr. Watts / Chord Electronics for a wonderful product!


----------



## nephilim32

jwbrent said:


> I’m in the same boat, plus the form factor doesn’t match the Qutest. We can only hope that Chord can find a way to bring this technology in a simplified version with a chassis that matches the Qutest ... for less money!
> 
> Rob has commented earlier about his doubts on this due to the cost of FPGA chips now and in the future ...



I have a great feeling the Chord team will put it together . there is a great market for it .They would make their money back and then some .

I will wait.


----------



## jbarrentine

This thread is so disappointing. Babbling page after page about PSUs when Rob Watts himself said the supplied psu was fine.


----------



## Triode User

jbarrentine said:


> This thread is so disappointing. Babbling page after page about PSUs when Rob Watts himself said the supplied psu was fine.



But life would be very boring if we all just accepted what we are told. And in saying that I am not commenting at all on whether or not I think the PSU swoppers are wasting their time. It is part of life’s rich pageant that we try stuff and discuss it. It is why we like this hobby. i personally know that if I had just accepted other pronouncements at face value then I would not have bothered to experiment and my system would not sound as good as it does.


----------



## OctavianH (Jan 26, 2019)

When Rob Watt will live in my apartment and will test its DACs on my power mains I will believe him. Everyone has a different environment, so do not really take 1:1 the specs. Some of us use this DAC plugged near the PC or other equipment since not all of us have a special electrical line for the audio system. For me the difference using an LPS with Qutest was not at all subtle, we can say it was a major change. I am fully convinced that the difference is much smaller when you test it in your test lab, with source a battery powered Macbook and you do not have as many "noise generators" as in my room.


----------



## cobrabucket

Hey guys. Long, rambling, detailed question to follow: I currently use 2 different DACs 1. SMSL SU-8 for Hi-Res and DSD and 2. Schiit Modi Multibit [Mimby] for 16 bit. I have BH Crack Tube amp, a Stax srm-t1 electrostatic tube amp and a THX 789. The nicest phones I own are the Koss 950, followed by Sennheiser 6XX and Argon Mk3. I want to know if you think it would be worth it to upgade my DAC. Ideally, I'd like to use 1 DAC for everything. I have heard videos comparing a Chord Qutest with RME ADI DAC2 and really like the thicker, fuller sound of the Qutest. How similar does the 2Cute sound to the Qutest? Would the Denafrips ARES be good at the Hi-Res audio? I know it could play it, just like the Mimby can play Hi-Res, but the Mimby doesn't really seem to give it anything "special" above that for technological reason I can't explain but have seen people discuss on the Mimby thread here. I think I saw somewhere that the ARES uses a 20-bit ladder. Is this right? If so, does that mean it would have diminishing reurns when dealing with Hi-Res PCM? Someone mentioned I might like the Ifi Micro iDSD BL, but it comes with an amp and I don't really need an extra amp. Someone else said the RME ADI2 DAC would be a good fit, but it also has an amp that I don't seem to need and in the videos referenced above, the Qutest seemed to sound better to me. Also seen someone saying SMSL VMV D1 should be considered. I do like the nice multibit bass sound of the Mimby but also like the clean, detailed sound of the SU-8. Maybe there is a best of both worlds? Would any of this even matter at the Mid-Fi level of equipment I am at? Would I be better served by saving up to get some upgraded phones [Aeolus, HD820 or Stax L700]? My head is spinning. I want it all, but must choose wisely. Need Guidance... Thanks!


----------



## miketlse

jbarrentine said:


> This thread is so disappointing. Babbling page after page about PSUs when Rob Watts himself said the supplied psu was fine.


Why are you surprised?
This thread is populated by head-fiers who are a small subset of the global population of humanity.
If you look at the wider global population, you will find individuals who firmly state that the earth is round or flat, man did or did not land on the moon, capitalism or socialism is best, etc.......... regardless of the evidence/facts.
Us head-fiers on this thread, share the same types of minds, thought processes, subconscious biases, etc as the rest of humanity, so you are never going to achieve 100% consensus that chord dacs/upscalers do or do not benefit from other power supplies.

I realise that the never ending debate about power supplies is frustrating for Rob Watts, but he will never be able to convince everybody.


----------



## jwbrent

miketlse said:


> Why are you surprised?
> This thread is populated by head-fiers who are a small subset of the global population of humanity.
> If you look at the wider global population, you will find individuals who firmly state that the earth is round or flat, man did or did not land on the moon, capitalism or socialism is best, etc.......... regardless of the evidence/facts.
> Us head-fiers on this thread, share the same types of minds, thought processes, subconscious biases, etc as the rest of humanity, so you are never going to achieve 100% consensus that chord dacs/upscalers do or do not benefit from other power supplies.
> ...



Rob has also stated he doesn’t believe in burn-in, or at least he’s never heard the supposed improvements that some of us, including me, claim we’ve heard. We all have different ears, sensitivities, gear, and listening environments. If a tweak makes one happier about how their system performs, I say enjoy the music!


----------



## betula

I have got on loan the iFi Pro iCan and Pro iDSD. I am playing with them and my 2Qute, CMA600i and Liquid Platinum. 
One of the unexpected revelations of this game so far is that there is better DAC than my 2Qute. 2Qute does hold up quite well against the 4-5 times more expensive Pro iDSD, but no doubt, the Pro iDSD is the overall better DAC. 

This discovery made me extremely curious about the Qutest, as the Qutest might be just as good or better than the Pro iDSD keeping all the Chord DAC strengths I like. Chord's strengths in my opinion are the soundstage depth and lifelikeness. In this two things even 2Qute is better than the Pro iDSD. The Pro iDSD however has a much better control and coherency, especially at the low end. And the top too. Slightly more resolving, wider soundstage better dynamic control. I do miss soundstage depth though. What stroke me with the iDSD is the bass control and authority vs. the 2Qute. 

Since I do not need the versatile feature arsenal of the iDSD and I don't have £2500 for a DAC, I am very seriously considering the Qutest. I heard the Hugo2, so I am pretty sure Qutest is much better than my 2Qute.

My question is, does the Qutest have much better low end control and authority vs. the 2Qute? This is a key factor for me. Thanks.


----------



## stevedlu

betula said:


> I have got on loan the iFi Pro iCan and Pro iDSD. I am playing with them and my 2Qute, CMA600i and Liquid Platinum.
> One of the unexpected revelations of this game so far is that there is better DAC than my 2Qute. 2Qute does hold up quite well against the 4-5 times more expensive Pro iDSD, but no doubt, the Pro iDSD is the overall better DAC.
> 
> This discovery made me extremely curious about the Qutest, as the Qutest might be just as good or better than the Pro iDSD keeping all the Chord DAC strengths I like. Chord's strengths in my opinion are the soundstage depth and lifelikeness. In this two things even 2Qute is better than the Pro iDSD. The Pro iDSD however has a much better control and coherency, especially at the low end. And the top too. Slightly more resolving, wider soundstage better dynamic control. I do miss soundstage depth though. What stroke me with the iDSD is the bass control and authority vs. the 2Qute.
> ...



If you've heard the Hugo2 then the Qutest is a near identical match with a slight edge going towards the Qutest. Qutest will be a big upgrade in the low end compared to 2qute. I use the Qutest CMA600i combo, it could use a very slight improvement in bass impact, however for the price and considering the overall sonics the Qutest is a phenomenal value.


----------



## Hummer25

I have had the Qutest on loan for a weekend and tried it with a MacBook Pro / Audirvana and an Innuos Zen mini.  The laptop combination was ok but easily surpassed in every way with the Innuos Zen so I would say source components do make quite a difference even with well sorted DACs like Qutest.

Qutest is a superb DAC and highly transparent, detailed and easy to listen too for long periods. I have compared it to DAVE and it is 70% there but with an m-scaler I think it could take it up to 80-90%. However DAVE with the m-scaler is a seriously great combination that I believe cannot be matched by anything on the planet for its smooth analogue like sound and huge soundstage and depth.

I have not heard a Qutest with an m-scaler but would be interested to hear if anyone has tried this combination. M-scaler technology took DAVE To another level that once heard makes going back to DAVE on its own difficult. I am sure the same would be the case with Qutest.


----------



## jwbrent (Jan 26, 2019)

Hummer25 said:


> I have had the Qutest on loan for a weekend and tried it with a MacBook Pro / Audirvana and an Innuos Zen mini.  The laptop combination was ok but easily surpassed in every way with the Innuos Zen so I would say source components do make quite a difference even with well sorted DACs like Qutest.
> 
> Qutest is a superb DAC and highly transparent, detailed and easy to listen too for long periods. I have compared it to DAVE and it is 70% there but with an m-scaler I think it could take it up to 80-90%. However DAVE with the m-scaler is a seriously great combination that I believe cannot be matched by anything on the planet for its smooth analogue like sound and huge soundstage and depth.
> 
> I have not heard a Qutest with an m-scaler but would be interested to hear if anyone has tried this combination. M-scaler technology took DAVE To another level that once heard makes going back to DAVE on its own difficult. I am sure the same would be the case with Qutest.



Interesting experience. I keep going back and forth on using my MacBook Air with Audirvana+ or going to the new Project streamer or Innuos.

Anyway you can quantify the differences? Where did you hear the biggest improvements? Did you use the same USB cable with the Innuos as you did your MacBook Pro?

Appreciate any thoughts you might have ... or others, too!


----------



## miketlse

Hummer25 said:


> I have had the Qutest on loan for a weekend and tried it with a MacBook Pro / Audirvana and an Innuos Zen mini.  The laptop combination was ok but easily surpassed in every way with the Innuos Zen so I would say source components do make quite a difference even with well sorted DACs like Qutest.
> 
> Qutest is a superb DAC and highly transparent, detailed and easy to listen too for long periods. I have compared it to DAVE and it is 70% there but with an m-scaler I think it could take it up to 80-90%. However DAVE with the m-scaler is a seriously great combination that I believe cannot be matched by anything on the planet for its smooth analogue like sound and huge soundstage and depth.
> 
> I have not heard a Qutest with an m-scaler but would be interested to hear if anyone has tried this combination. M-scaler technology took DAVE To another level that once heard makes going back to DAVE on its own difficult. I am sure the same would be the case with Qutest.


Hopefully @Christer could provide some feedback to you.
I think that he has tried the Qutest/MScaler combo, and been impressed.


----------



## Hummer25

jwbrent said:


> Interesting experience. I keep going back and forth on using my MacBook Air with Audirvana+ or going to the new Project streamer or Innuos.
> 
> Anyway you can quantify the differences? Where did you hear the biggest improvements? Did you use the same USB cable with the Innuos as you did your MacBook Pro?
> 
> Appreciate any thoughts you might have ... or others, too!



The Innuos via the Qutest was much more vivid and dynamic especially in the bass area. My MacBook Pro was lightweight in comparison.  I found that files from the Innuos were more three dimensions and had real presence where as the MacBook sounded a bit mechanical and thin.


----------



## Hummer25

miketlse said:


> Hopefully @Christer could provide some feedback to you.
> I think that he has tried the Qutest/MScaler combo, and been impressed.



Anyone who has not heard an m-scaler with a Chord DAC should not underestimate what difference it makes. It took DAVE up a couple of levels. It reminded me when you are in the cinema watching the adverts at the beginning and then the curtains open up fully to reveal the whole screen for the main presentation. The added width and depth m-scaler added to DAVE was not subtle and I would say say there was a degree of extra smoothness that made it so addictive to listen too.

Hopefully Christer can let me know what m-scaler does with Qutest.


----------



## jwbrent

Hummer25 said:


> The Innuos via the Qutest was much more vivid and dynamic especially in the bass area. My MacBook Pro was lightweight in comparison.  I found that files from the Innuos were more three dimensions and had real presence where as the MacBook sounded a bit mechanical and thin.



ok, thank you for your thoughts.


----------



## Windseeker

Hummer25 said:


> I have not heard a Qutest with an m-scaler but would be interested to hear if anyone has tried this combination. M-scaler technology took DAVE To another level that once heard makes going back to DAVE on its own difficult. I am sure the same would be the case with Qutest.



I've been using M Scaler alongside Qutest for a little more than a month. To me, the difference -- the improved naturalness, believability, intimacy of music -- is clear and non-trivial. I definitely wouldn't want to go back to a world without one (which, as you know, can be done with a simple press of a button on M Scaler).

However, after a month's use, I've got an impression that, to be able to really enjoy those benefits from M Scaler, one needs a reasonably revealing system to go along with reasonably well-recorded (read: with reasonable amount of air/texture/depth and not horribly compressed) material.  So, other users' MMV.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Hummer25

Windseeker said:


> I've been using M Scaler alongside Qutest for a little more than a month. To me, the difference -- the improved naturalness, believability, intimacy of music -- is clear and non-trivial. I definitely wouldn't want to go back to a world without one (which, as you know, can be done with a simple press of a button on M Scaler).
> 
> However, after a month's use, I've got an impression that, to be able to really enjoy those benefits from M Scaler, one needs a reasonably revealing system to go along with reasonably well-recorded (read: with reasonable amount of air/texture/depth and not horribly compressed) material.  So, other users' MMV.
> 
> Just my two cents.




Thanks for confirming your thoughts on the Qutest / M-scaler. The benefits of using the m-scaler are much the same as the experience I had when listening to it with DAVE.  As you mentioned you can easily hear the difference at the press of a button! 

Having such a high level of resolution available however does reveal the truth about mastering and production quality of recordings. Coming from a high end vinyl/analogue background this is easily apparent but now digital playback has moved on to such a level it shows Rob Watts is going in the right direction. Much of his recent work with DAVE and the m-scaler is moving digital much closer to analogue in its delivery of sound and reproduction of the original recording. 

One of the greatest Mastering engineers was speaking a few years back and he mentioned that the problem with digital music was not the recording,which he thought was extremely good, but the reconstruction of the recording and that we had not yet fully worked out how to do this in a totally convincing way, unlike the best analogue playback systems. Chords DACs are closing in on this ability all the time especially with the introduction of the m-scaler.

I have mentioned before that DAVE / M-scaler sounds more like analogue master tape than anything else I have heard. Of course if you played the same recording in a demonstration you would hear the difference but I am sure they would be quite close in their overall delivery. A friend of mine quite often record s digital music onto a R2R machine and it interesting how much better it sounds rather than playing it back through a DAC.

So we are now moving into a period of digital music playback that is not just about detail retrieval but also more complex areas such as space and timing and the overall musical experience. Potentially I think Digital recording and playback has the potential to surpass even the best Analogue recordings as long as the production and mastering is done well. So much music today is destroyed by poor mastering and when you have highly revealing systems it becomes all to apparent and for me it's a deal breaker and I find it hard to listen too even if the music is great!


----------



## Chester Rockwell

@Windseeker @Hummer25 thanks both for your comments regarding Qutest and M Scaler. I’ve read a lot about the M Scaler but I’ve never really seen a clear opinion on how much improvement it makes to studio albums. There has been lots of talk regarding acoustic and live recordings, and even classical recordings but less so regarding a standard pop/rock studio album. 

Now I know that all albums aren’t created equal and the M Scaler (nor any other component) can’t make up for badly mastered or recorded albums, but the most I have heard on the subject of studio albums is that the M Scaler improves everything to a certain degree. That’s fine and most likely true if you think about how it works, but if the improvments for your average studio album are much less noticeable, for someone like me who primarily listens to pop/rock albums from the last 50 or so years, it becomes a less urgent purchase at its current price.

The answer, no doubt, it that I should try it for myself and I may well do soon, I just wondered if either of you (or anyone else of course), had any views on this?

Thanks


----------



## Triode User

Chester Rockwell said:


> @Windseeker @Hummer25 thanks both for your comments regarding Qutest and M Scaler. I’ve read a lot about the M Scaler but I’ve never really seen a clear opinion on how much improvement it makes to studio albums. There has been lots of talk regarding acoustic and live recordings, and even classical recordings but less so regarding a standard pop/rock studio album.
> 
> Now I know that all albums aren’t created equal and the M Scaler (nor any other component) can’t make up for badly mastered or recorded albums, but the most I have heard on the subject of studio albums is that the M Scaler improves everything to a certain degree. That’s fine and most likely true if you think about how it works, but if the improvments for your average studio album are much less noticeable, for someone like me who primarily listens to pop/rock albums from the last 50 or so years, it becomes a less urgent purchase at its current price.
> 
> ...



You are right that until you hear it for yourself you will never really know. However I probably listen to 80% studio albums and for me and those albums the MScaler is crazily awesome. And I'm talking about studio albums from the '60s through to this year. I don't listen to heavy metal but I listen to pretty much everything else. Of course Mscaler is great for classical and live acoustic but in my experience does the same stuff no matter what the type of music.

You have got to listen somehow at a dealer but have a look at this reviewer on YouTube. He has bought and uses the Mscaler and Qutest in his own system and he plays all sorts of music through them in his review videos and most of it is studio recorded stuff.
www.youtube.com/channel/UCrqva7JT_35j4zNcgan47bQ/videos


----------



## Hummer25

I think you may have answered your question yourself Chester in that the only real way to tell the difference will be to try one yourself. I think this would definitely be the best course of action as it is only in your system and with your music that you will be able to determine if the m-scaler makes a difference. 

I would say however that the m-scaler makes a difference to all recordings and in my experience I have heard mainly rock and electronic music through DAVE and M-scaler. The difference is not subtle. The scale and depth of the recordings seem to be enhanced and there is an additional smoothness to the sound. The m-scaler seems to open up the recording somewhat and allow you to hear more of what is there! 
Sorry if this does not come across as a technical appreciation, it's just what my ears hear.


----------



## Christer

Hummer25 said:


> Anyone who has not heard an m-scaler with a Chord DAC should not underestimate what difference it makes. It took DAVE up a couple of levels. It reminded me when you are in the cinema watching the adverts at the beginning and then the curtains open up fully to reveal the whole screen for the main presentation. The added width and depth m-scaler added to DAVE was not subtle and I would say say there was a degree of extra smoothness that made it so addictive to listen too.
> 
> Hopefully Christer can let me know what m-scaler does with Qutest.



 Hello Hummer.
I have been using my Qutest with an MScaler for roughly two months on an almost daily basis. And I can  definitely say that it makes a BIG difference compared to Qutest on its own.
For me there is  absolutely NO going back to Qutest on its own.
Qutest on its own is as I have said before an improvement over what came before it from Chord in the same or similar price range but it is NOT close to DAVE on its own imo. 
It is far from perfect on its own.
I know Rob is not always happy when I quote him, but I think even he said that without Mscaling H2 or whichever dac he was using without Mscaling temporarily, sounding" pretty awful." 

 I am also quite difficult to please and DAVE was the first and ONLY DAC from Chord that had me really impressed with digital in most aspects except DSD which it did not excel at  imo.

And good as the  Qutest /MScaler combo  sounds to me via headphones only so far, DAVE /MScaler is even better if as close as possible to how acoustic music actually sounds live is one's ultimate goal.
Acoustic music in general and large scale western classical in particular, still remains my one and only reference point.
I have not yet been able to A/B DAVE on its own with Qutest/MScaler under ideal conditions . 
But in some respects  Qutest /MScaler will beat DAVE on its own imo.
With DSD it does to my ears. And with 16/44.1 as well.
I am not sure how much the 1M taps matter with  actual high sample native  rates from 24/96 and higher.
But since the 164000 or whatever number of taps DAVE works at on its own, are  not used anyway with an M Scaler into the equation, the main advantages of a Dave with an MScaler might entirely  depend on more advanced/better analouge parts PSU and such used in it, than parts used in cheaper dacs like Qutest? 
One thing that I don't understand at all is the "elements" 10 versus 20 in DAVE often mentioned  by Rob.
Would increasing elements  be as important as increasing the number of taps?
If so, why not make a dac with 100 elements or a 1000+ Or 1000000 elements?
Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Windseeker

Chester Rockwell said:


> @Windseeker @Hummer25 thanks both for your comments regarding Qutest and M Scaler. I’ve read a lot about the M Scaler but I’ve never really seen a clear opinion on how much improvement it makes to studio albums. There has been lots of talk regarding acoustic and live recordings, and even classical recordings but less so regarding a standard pop/rock studio album.
> 
> Now I know that all albums aren’t created equal and the M Scaler (nor any other component) can’t make up for badly mastered or recorded albums, but the most I have heard on the subject of studio albums is that the M Scaler improves everything to a certain degree. That’s fine and most likely true if you think about how it works, but if the improvments for your average studio album are much less noticeable, for someone like me who primarily listens to pop/rock albums from the last 50 or so years, it becomes a less urgent purchase at its current price.



I'm basically a 30% Classical, 30% Metal/Rock, 30% Jazz/Fusion, 10% Pop kinda person.  Now, I'm first to admit that the benefit M Scaler technology brings to classical music (because depth -- one of the crown jewels of M Scaler -- matters in just about every single recording) appears to be so overwhelming, it almost feels like a no-brainer.  

However, I do find subtle but non-trivial benefits for many Rock/Pop studio recordings.  I say this because being a typical audiophile (LOL), as soon as I realized how darn good the Qutest+M Scaler combo really is, I started to revisit my favorite stuff all over again.  And the pleasant surprises occured in many rock/pop recordings as well.

My early impression is any instrument directly recorded by microphone (vocals, drums, percussion, saxphones, acoustic guitars, etc.) with reasonable "texture" in tact (that is, not damaged beyond repair by compression / level boosting during the mixing process) can benefit, even more so if reverbs are applied.  Now, bass is an interesting case.  Regardless of acoustic or electrical, M Scaler appears to benefit the quality (timbre) of bass sound greatly in many recordings.

Well, in order to be able to perceive such benefits, one's system needs to be reasonably revealing, and in terms of bass, be able to go deep with reasonable precision.  I happen to believe that head-fiers have relative advantage here, as it seems it's less costly to achieve this via reasonable headphones/iems -- as opposed to loudspeakers.  

I guess what I'm trying to get at is, it all depends on your system and sound characteristics of your favorite recordings.  M Scaler's not cheap, but if you feel intrigued & can afford it, it might well be worthwhile to do yourself a favor and try a demo with your favorite cans/tunes.


----------



## Chester Rockwell

Thanks @Triode User @Hummer25 @Windseeker , some very useful and interesting observations. As we have all agreed, the only real way to know if it adds enough for me personally is via a demo. That’s what I shall do.

@Christer I don’t think @Rob Watts minds being quoted, so long as the quote is accurate and in context. I’m sure we’re all the same in that respect.


----------



## gasmonkey

It's been a while, so here is an update: 

The Qutest is the lynchpin of my system. Never before has my imagination left me blanked as to how something could even conceivably sound better. Of course it could sound better, but thats not the point. The point is, I have never heard better, can't imagine better, and am quiet happy, for now. I give equal parts credit to a Mr. Vandersteen for the accuracy, realism and spatial coherency of well placed 3a's. I have little experience as an audiophile in other brands, but I believe that Rob Watts philosophy of Taps and Timing are a magical fit with Mr. Vandersteen's philosophy of Phase and Time coherency.

Experimenting with the Qutest is very revealing, and as I get closer to the perfect sound, it becomes possible to revisit past comparisons and see an even more obvious difference when substituting pieces of the puzzle.

1. Power:

Forgive me for starting out with a well worn subject, but its crucial in the order of operations for my system and for this post to first talk about the power supplying everything.
My best results have been with a single cord out of the wall, into a Furman Elite 15i Powerline conditioner. Any additional connections to the Mains of the house reduce sound quality. Period. These additional connections include plugging the Amplifier directly into the wall, plugging Qutest directly into the wall, or plugging the laptop into the wall.

For best sound, the Qutest gets plugged into the Furman, and the laptop runs on battery. (Also tried Qutest into battery pack, not as good, but I didn't have the proper 5v pack as recommended by Rob, so I will simply say the Furman is better than direct into the wall) The Amp also gets plugged into the Furman.
-Things I did not try: Plugging the Synology into the wall, plugging the router into the wall. Will try this later, but I don't believe this is the proper path to Nirvana. Once I find Nirvana, I will go back and see if I can find it again out of the NAS and Router. Of course I could break these two components apart, but the point is this combo would allow wireless operation. Take out the Wireless Router and I still have to plug my laptop in. I can still have the NAS and Router running, and the laptop can retrieve music from it, and the NAS and wireless router can be on an entire different outlet in the house. So the point is moot, either its wireless or its not, and going wireless only complicates the chain, and I hear no improvement, and anecdotally believe it is worse.

2. Transport:
I have tried running Roon on a New Synology 918+ with a solid state drive, as well as running Roon on my laptop from an NVME m.2 2280 SSD.
Observations:
-On the laptop, everything works well, and I get the best experience so far. +1 for Qutest's Galvanic Isolation (Dell XPS 15, 8th gen i7, NVME SSD, USB 3.1 Gen 1)
-For now, the Synology doesn't perform at the level of my laptop. Why not? I'm not sure yet, I'm still tweaking the room and cables, then I will revisit the issue. As mentioned above, I also don't care to get the NAS performing at the level of the laptop unless it also pairs with the wireless router to go wireless. So first things first, make the best system sound wise, then see if I can get the same sound but with the additional two components making the system wireless.

3. Cables:
I used to be a firm believer that all the cable talk was for idiots. The truth was that I had never had a revealing system until the Qutest got dropped in the equation. and I had never spent more than $75usd on a cable, much less A/B'ed multiple cables. The local audio store was nice enough (or as you will see, evil enough) to send me home with some cables to try. The purpose of this is not to vouch for any cables, but to say that the Qutest is revealing enough that cables absolutely do make a difference. I tried the Audioquest Red (Cinnamon?) which sounded ok. Then the Chord Vee3 Cobra. After that I went back to the store and said the Cobra sounded better, so lets go a step up and see if I still get better sound. So the guy sent me home with what I thought were the next two levels, Chord Chameleon Vee3, and Chord Anthem Reference. I spent a whole day with the Chameleons, and thought they were awesome! I thought for sure they would be the ones, what could I be missing, its just a cable...... Then I plugged in the Anthem References. I can't describe the change well, but if I tried, I would say this: the music radiated from smaller points in space (pinpoint accuracy), and as such  waves of sound did not build upon themselves and overpower the listener. Instead the music seemed to have a larger soundstage with all the available sounds able to exist in the same physical space without becoming two waves of water meeting to drown he listener. The next day I went back to the audio store and the guy told me to "forget about the white cable", its actually a few steps up in the line and like $800USD. I told him to screw off, its staying right where it is, I'll come up with the cash.

Anyway, enough cable talk, It seems dumb. I will however say I believe this improvement to be from the silver used in the Chord Odyssey 4 Biwire cable and Anthem Reference RCAs. Until I hear with my ears otherwise, that's the best explanation that fits my worldview (silver having 105% the conductivity of copper)

4. Without a good listening room and proper speaker placement (even down to the 16th of an inch), little of the above would be relevant. 

5. My opinion so far on two talked about Rob Watts statements:

In regards to the stock power supply: Yes, the stock power supply is sufficient as Rob has stated. Yes, you can potentially do better as users have attested to, but only if all the other pieces work as well (example, plug the laptop into the wall and the benefits of the DAC using linear power supply disappear OR plug the amp into the wall and the benefits of the LPS disappear). It seems from my limited experience that power supply and conditioning are an all or nothing proposition that also require a streamlined approach to minimize the chain of equipment and electrical noise. The benefits seen will vary widely. I now understand why LPS is such a contentious and talked about issue. Both sides are correct. It takes a bad power source, or a well thought out electrical chain before a LPS will make a difference. 

In regards to the Qutest having a "Galvonically Isolated" USB connection and the source not mattering, I can't say for sure, but I tend to agree. I don't plan on buying a network streamer anytime soon. I believe that the Galvonic Isolation works, and that I probably get most of the benefit of an expensive network streamer by running a 14nm lithography processor and m.2 2280 SSD through a pretty new USB 3.1 port ON BATTERY POWER. One thing I might try in the future is a USB-C data cable for Qutest. This could use the USB 3.1 gen 2 port on my laptop. (Current is full sized USB 3.1 gen 1). This could be worse though with more internal things connected to the multi-use USB C port. Or, most likely, it would be the same since the Galvanic Isolation on the Qutest theoretically renders this issue moot.


Thanks for listening, Flame Away!


----------



## ATXKyle

gasmonkey said:


> It's been a while, so here is an update:
> 
> The Qutest is the lynchpin of my system. Never before has my imagination left me blanked as to how something could even conceivably sound better. Of course it could sound better, but thats not the point. The point is, I have never heard better, can't imagine better, and am quiet happy, for now. I give equal parts credit to a Mr. Vandersteen for the accuracy, realism and spatial coherency of well placed 3a's. I have little experience as an audiophile in other brands, but I believe that Rob Watts philosophy of Taps and Timing are a magical fit with Mr. Vandersteen's philosophy of Phase and Time coherency.
> 
> ...



Thanks for sharing!  I’d really like to try a good power conditioner at some point.  From my experience with the 2qute (which also has the galvanic isolation) you likely would get further big improvements by optimizing source (and source power supply).


----------



## stevedlu

gasmonkey said:


> It's been a while, so here is an update:
> 
> The Qutest is the lynchpin of my system. Never before has my imagination left me blanked as to how something could even conceivably sound better. Of course it could sound better, but thats not the point. The point is, I have never heard better, can't imagine better, and am quiet happy, for now. I give equal parts credit to a Mr. Vandersteen for the accuracy, realism and spatial coherency of well placed 3a's. I have little experience as an audiophile in other brands, but I believe that Rob Watts philosophy of Taps and Timing are a magical fit with Mr. Vandersteen's philosophy of Phase and Time coherency.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the post. Its quite amazing when you reach that level of transparency and every component in your chain makes a difference. I also enjoy a Furman Elite 15 powerfactor for my Amp coupled with some high quality solid (not plated) silver interconnects. With my Qutest, I have tried almost every power source imaginable.  Linear power supplies (big downgrade in sound, adds too much noise), Ultra Cap LPS 1.2,  ifi ipower, various power packs, etc. and I've settle with my top two. 1. Pocket Juice 20,000mah 2. Chord's stock psu. The Pocket Juice has the best clarity and least amount of noise and its a significant upgrade to stock, well worth the money. 

If you want to dive into even deeper territory try replacing your Power receptacle with upgraded "audiophile quality" one. I have the AudioQuest NRG Edison, it was by far the biggest bump in sound quality compared to the rest of my components in power chain ex. Cables, Furman Elite 15PF


----------



## Hummer25

Christer said:


> Hello Hummer.
> I have been using my Qutest with an MScaler for roughly two months on an almost daily basis. And I can  definitely say that it makes a BIG difference compared to Qutest on its own.
> For me there is  absolutely NO going back to Qutest on its own.
> Qutest on its own is as I have said before an improvement over what came before it from Chord in the same or similar price range but it is NOT close to DAVE on its own imo.
> ...



Thanks for your reply Christer. From what you have said the Qutest with m-scaler maybe a bargain when you consider the price of DAVE and M-scaler. I was mightily impressed with Qutest in my system and really ought to try it with an m- scaler. The next generation of Chord DACs could be very interesting indeed but difficult to speculate where the performance upgrades are going to come from. Better PSU, more taps, m-scaler 2 or maybe there are areas Rob Watts is looking into that we have yet to know about. Obviously the next Hugo,Mojo and Qutest can all be moved closer to DAVE but where does DAVE go to?


----------



## dac64

Hummer25 said:


> ...Obviously the next Hugo,Mojo and Qutest can all be moved closer to DAVE but where does DAVE go to?



Dave 2


----------



## Chester Rockwell

I think Rob mentioned in the Watts Up thread a few months back that at this moment in time, he is not sure what could be done to improve upon DAVE’s performance.


----------



## ea666 (Jan 28, 2019)

So.... my experience with the Qutest was ummmm 50/50 I'd say.  

Reading the various reviews and hype about the Qutest it leads you to believe your listening experience is due to become magical, with extra detail, and overall better sound.

However, this wasn't the case for me and the hype disappointed me somewhat!  

Don't get me wrong my personal experience with the this DAC was pleasant in the fact that it feels like a quality device and was easy to set up and use.  Whether it bought any magic to my ears? I honestly could not say as I really couldn't hear any difference between the DAC in my pre AMP and the Qutest DAC. 

Now I'm no audio expert I'm just your regular enthusiast who spends a little part of my disposable income on technology.

If anyone is looking to get one, I would strongly recommend a home trial.  Hope this helps.


----------



## Zzt231gr

ea666 said:


> So.... my experience with the Qutest was ummmm 50/50 I'd say.
> 
> Reading the various reviews and hype about the Qutest it leads you to believe your listening experience is due to become magical, with extra detail, and overall better sound.
> 
> ...


Which amp?


----------



## ea666

Zzt231gr said:


> Which amp?



Cyrus Pre2DAC QX.


----------



## AlexB73

What speakers and amplifier do you use?
Or do you use headphones?
If setup is not transparent enough, the difference between different DACs will be small.


----------



## ea666

AlexB73 said:


> What speakers and amplifier do you use?
> Or do you use headphones?
> If setup is not transparent enough, the difference between different DACs will be small.



My set up is

Cyrus Pre2DAC QX (pre amp)
Cyrus Stereo 200 (power amp)
Monitor Audio PL200 II (Speakers)

Not a headphone user.


----------



## Zzt231gr

I doubt that they sound similar,seeing this preamp cost.

Have you used optical input?As our fellow above says,is your system revealing enough?


----------



## Zzt231gr

ea666 said:


> My set up is
> 
> Cyrus Pre2DAC QX (pre amp)
> Cyrus Stereo 200 (power amp)
> ...


Seems like you got a fairly good system.Very weird case for me...


----------



## ea666

Zzt231gr said:


> I doubt that they sound similar,seeing this preamp cost.
> 
> Have you used optical input?As our fellow above says,is your system revealing enough?



Strangely when I went back to the preamp DAC, my system sounded more lively... my accommodating wife thought I lost the plot due to my level of concentration and trying to hear that magical difference over the last few weeks.

I tried both the optical and BNC inputs and connecting to the laptop too.

Other sources I tried was a Bluesound Node 2i, Cyrus Stream X Signature and Cyrus CDt CD transport.


----------



## ea666

Zzt231gr said:


> Seems like you got a fairly good system.Very weird case for me...



I think I may have been expecting too much.  

I'm now looking forward to Cyrus's new QXR DAC upgrade recently announced at £600


----------



## Zzt231gr

ea666 said:


> I think I may have been expecting too much.
> 
> I'm now looking forward to Cyrus's new QXR DAC upgrade recently announced at £600


One last thing but of equal importance;is your listening room treated?


----------



## ea666

Zzt231gr said:


> One last thing but of equal importance;is your listening room treated?



When you say treated, as in acoustic foam?


----------



## AlexB73

Monitor Audio PL200 should be resolved enough for sure!
But I am not so sure about Cyrus Stereo 200 digital amplifier.
As a class D amplifier it convert analog input to digital and back to analog.
These extra A to D to A conversions can easily erase the difference between DACs.


----------



## ea666

AlexB73 said:


> Monitor Audio PL200 should be resolved enough for sure!
> But I am not so sure about Cyrus Stereo 200 digital amplifier.
> As a class D amplifier it convert analog input to digital and back to analog.
> These extra A to D to A conversions can easily erase the difference between DACs.



Never thought of that!  Hummm food for thought.


----------



## Zzt231gr

ea666 said:


> When you say treated, as in acoustic foam?


Αcoustic foam alone creates problems.You need broadband absorbers and if the listening room is dedicated without usual furniture,you need bass traps,also.


----------



## MagnusH

I considered the new Sonore opticalRenu, but then I remember that Rob Watts seem to like toslink. Will you get equal (or better) sound on the Cutest with toslink compared to a well isolated and clean USB? Can it handle DSD64/128 on toslink?


----------



## dc71

MagnusH said:


> I considered the new Sonore opticalRenu, but then I remember that Rob Watts seem to like toslink. Will you get equal (or better) sound on the Cutest with toslink compared to a well isolated and clean USB? Can it handle DSD64/128 on toslink?



Toslink is limited bandwidth so it won't handle DSD, or usually anything above 24/96, depending on the transport spec. 
Previously fed by Bluesound Node2, I couldn't hear much diff between toslink and digital coax. But now in my system, Qutest being fed by Lumin U1 Mini sounds best using CuriousUSB cable (I tried other USB, toslink and expensive BNC cables). It sounds even better (more real perception) to my ears when I activate the upsampling in the Lumin to 24/384 for both CD quality files (Tidal/local NAS) and high-res 24bit files.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

MagnusH said:


> I considered the new Sonore opticalRenu, but then I remember that Rob Watts seem to like toslink. Will you get equal (or better) sound on the Cutest with toslink compared to a well isolated and clean USB? Can it handle DSD64/128 on toslink?


I`ve tried toslink with Qutest. Optical output in my MacBookPo sounds better (not day and night, but noticeable) than USB, but it is limited to 24/192.


----------



## x RELIC x (Jan 29, 2019)

dc71 said:


> Toslink is limited bandwidth so it won't handle DSD, or usually anything above 24/96, depending on the transport spec.



TOSlink standard can handle 24/192 and DSD64. My Mojo and Hugo2 plays both just fine over optical. The determining factor is the cable and whether it can transmit the data bandwidth. A cable with poor reflections will reduce data throughput, or as you say, the transport is out of spec.


----------



## jbarrentine (Jan 29, 2019)

I'm a fan of toslink. I don't like having to install drivers either.

Using  https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0017YUN3C/

definitely get glass.


----------



## MagnusH

jbarrentine said:


> I'm a fan of toslink. I don't like having to install drivers either.


I like toslink for its simplicity and galvanic isolation. Its possible to get USB isolated but it requires an ethernet transport and fiber-ethernet, and then the ethernet transport has to be well made so it don't produce any electronic noise. All in all, it tends to get expensive (for example, upcoming $1300 opticalRendu). If toslink gives same sound quality, I would prefer that since I have computer one meter away.

I don't listen to anything above 192 kHz anyway, so I won't miss the higher bandwidths.


----------



## OctavianH

I just tried the iFi iPurifier (1st gen) with Qutest (remembered I had one at my office and brought it back home just to try it). The impression was not very good, since it did not improved the sound, but somehow made it loose the dynamics and sound more "flat". What to say, I do not recommend this device. Did anyone had a different impression? I tried some FLAC 16/44.1 here, so nothing fancy.


----------



## betula

What would you people consider as a competition to the Qutest on the DAC market? 

I am a big fan of Chord sound and Rob's engineering. The soundstage depth and lifelikeness of vocals/acoustic instruments is unparalleled with these FPGA chips regardless tap numbers. I loved my Mojo and I love my 2Qute.

I am fortunate enough though to have the iFi Pro iDSD (£2400) around as a DAC which is undeniably better than my 2Qute. The 2Qute is still very slightly better in soundstage depth and vocal lifelikeness, but the supremacy of the Pro iDSD as a DAC is undeniable. The control, tightness, layering, extension is all on another level. The soundstage is wider, bass control is just phenomenal. The only problem with this DAC is the price tag, I couldn't really afford it. Also, I don't need 80% of the versatile functionalities of this DAC. I just want a simple plug&play DAC like the 2Qute or Qutest. 

After this testing period with the Pro iDSD I will definitely hunt for a better DAC than my 2Qute, my only question is if it should be the Qutest? Has anyone compared the iFi Pro iDSD and the Qutest? Perhaps the bass control is what amazes me the most versus my 2Qute. Is there any other DAC worth looking at around £1000? I imagine the answer is no, but thought I ask anyway.


----------



## betula

OctavianH said:


> I just tried the iFi iPurifier (1st gen) with Qutest (remembered I had one at my office and brought it back home just to try it). The impression was not very good, since it did not improved the sound, but somehow made it loose the dynamics and sound more "flat". What to say, I do not recommend this device. Did anyone had a different impression? I tried some FLAC 16/44.1 here, so nothing fancy.


It doesn't really answer your question, but my iPurifier 3.0 makes my 2Qute much cleaner/tighter/more precise.


----------



## OctavianH

betula said:


> It doesn't really answer your question, but my iPurifier 3.0 makes my 2Qute much cleaner/tighter/more precise.



I own also a 2Qute but only Qutest has USB galvanic isolation, and this might be the reason it does not benefit from the iPurifiers.


----------



## betula

OctavianH said:


> I own also a 2Qute but only Qutest has USB galvanic isolation, and this might be the reason it does not benefit from the iPurifiers.


As far as I know the 2Qute also has galvanic isolation. For the very same reason I didn't expect much from the iPurifier 3. The results suprised me.


----------



## AlexB73

2Qute has USB galvanic isolation too.
Dispate that, in my case it benefits from iPurifier 2.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> As far as I know the 2Qute also has galvanic isolation. For the very same reason I didn't expect much from the iPurifier 3. The results suprised me.


Maybe in your case you have better cable so there is less benefits or simply source is less noisy...


----------



## betula

Arniesb said:


> Maybe in your case you have better cable so there is less benefits or simply source is less noisy...


The cable is the same. QED USB Performance Graphit and QED Qunex White RCA cables. Pretty basic but good enough quality I would say.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

OctavianH said:


> I just tried the iFi iPurifier (1st gen) with Qutest (remembered I had one at my office and brought it back home just to try it). The impression was not very good, since it did not improved the sound, but somehow made it loose the dynamics and sound more "flat". What to say, I do not recommend this device. Did anyone had a different impression? I tried some FLAC 16/44.1 here, so nothing fancy.


I have similar opinion about Schiit Wyrd. Wyrd is doing good job with my three other DACs, but Qutest sounds better without it. I would not recommend any "USB-decrapifiers" for Qutest, it`s USB input is good already. I would better save for cleaner source, like opticalRendu, or something like that.



betula said:


> After this testing period with the Pro iDSD I will definitely hunt for a better DAC than my 2Qute, my only question is if it should be the Qutest? Has anyone compared the iFi Pro iDSD and the Qutest? Perhaps the bass control is what amazes me the most versus my 2Qute. Is there any other DAC worth looking at around £1000? I imagine the answer is no, but thought I ask anyway.


I don't think that there is a better DAC for this price. All other DACs that I wanted to try cost two or three times more than Qutest. And if I start looking for upgrade, my first option would be not a new DAC, but a Chord M Scaler.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Give the ISO Regen a try if you can lay your hands on one. I got it used with the LPS-1 as a set with the intention of selling the ISO Rgen to recoup some cash.
I figured there was no harm giving it a go since I had the intention of selling it. That was 9 months ago. The ISO Regen is still in my setup.


----------



## OctavianH

Joe-Siow said:


> Give the ISO Regen a try if you can lay your hands on one. I got it used with the LPS-1 as a set with the intention of selling the ISO Rgen to recoup some cash.
> I figured there was no harm giving it a go since I had the intention of selling it. That was 9 months ago. The ISO Regen is still in my setup.



I read about ISO Regen and I might give it a try just for curiosity, even if I do not really expect that it will provide an improvement in sound quality. In my theory a power supply or analog cable (like for example RCA interconnects) might definitely benefit from isolation and clear signal but a digital stream of data shoud not, normally, be influenced in the same amount. My cable is good, or at least I consider it decent, it is a QED Reference 3m between my PC (I use a normal usb3.0 port from the motherboard) and the Qutest. If I will try the ISO Regen I will not use the LPS they provide because I already have a power conditioner where I might "clean" the AC power suply of the included transformer. I already use a LPS for Qutest and it provided a sensible improvement, a power conditioner for the tube amp and the only filtering I might add is for USB where, at the moment, I found out that Qutest sounds better without it.
To help all understand my setup I will post here this picture:


----------



## Arniesb

OctavianH said:


> I read about ISO Regen and I might give it a try just for curiosity, even if I do not really expect that it will provide an improvement in sound quality. In my theory a power supply or analog cable (like for example RCA interconnects) might definitely benefit from isolation and clear signal but a digital stream of data shoud not, normally, be influenced in the same amount. My cable is good, or at least I consider it decent, it is a QED Reference 3m between my PC (I use a normal usb3.0 port from the motherboard) and the Qutest. If I will try the ISO Regen I will not use the LPS they provide because I already have a power conditioner where I might "clean" the AC power suply of the included transformer. I already use a LPS for Qutest and it provided a sensible improvement, a power conditioner for the tube amp and the only filtering I might add is for USB where, at the moment, I found out that Qutest sounds better without it.
> To help all understand my setup I will post here this picture:


Very Classy and clean lookin setup right there!


----------



## OctavianH

Arniesb said:


> Very Classy and clean lookin setup right there!



Yep, I always liked the things to be "arranged". My girl calls this OCD


----------



## Skampmeister

jbarrentine said:


> This thread is so disappointing. Babbling page after page about PSUs when Rob Watts himself said the supplied psu was fine.



I agree, they all love Robs ear when it comes to building DAC’s, but fob it off when it comes to PSU’s.


----------



## Macaron

Hi, 

Had iPurifier 2 on Qutest, upgraded to Allo Usbridge (much better). 
Galvanic isolation isn't a miracle which makes the Qutest insensitive.
Now having the M Scaler in the chain, I wonder if I still need the Usbridge to clean up USB, have to try to connect my PC directly to M Scaler...


----------



## nick77

I had positive results using IsoRegen on my USB connection also.


----------



## HumanMedia

Macaron said:


> Hi,
> 
> Had iPurifier 2 on Qutest, upgraded to Allo Usbridge (much better).
> Galvanic isolation isn't a miracle which makes the Qutest insensitive.
> Now having the M Scaler in the chain, I wonder if I still need the Usbridge to clean up USB, have to try to connect my PC directly to M Scaler...



Re Galvanic isolation - I think many don’t realise that ‘isolation’ doesn’t mean isolation of noise, it means that the electrical connection is isolated via a magnetic bridge in a transformer. Galvanic isolation merely attenuates noise, it doesn’t isolate you from it.

Re iPurifier - I have no experience with versions Later than 1.0, which are undoubtedly better, but iPurifier 1 always made the 2Qute sound worse to my ears.


----------



## Deftone

OctavianH said:


> I just tried the iFi iPurifier (1st gen) with Qutest (remembered I had one at my office and brought it back home just to try it). The impression was not very good, since it did not improved the sound, but somehow made it loose the dynamics and sound more "flat". What to say, I do not recommend this device. Did anyone had a different impression? I tried some FLAC 16/44.1 here, so nothing fancy.



When i used iPurifier 3 i noticed it was best used on cheap low quality dacs with poor jitter surpression and no internal filertering etc. On well designed DACs like Qutest it has shown to add more noise and degrade measured performance. Same goes for ipower linear power adapter can make the noise floor worse on something like the ADI2.


----------



## GradoSound

Deftone said:


> On well designed DACs like Qutest it has shown to add more noise and degrade measured performance.



Do you have any link(s) to this claim? 

Especially degrading "measured performance" meaning someone took the time to measure it.


----------



## domho7

GradoSound said:


> Do you have any link(s) to this claim?
> 
> Especially degrading "measured performance" meaning someone took the time to measure it.



Interesting I would also like to know about this. As Cutest is on my short list of DACs


----------



## HumanMedia

Ragnar-BY said:


> I have similar opinion about Schiit Wyrd. Wyrd is doing good job with my three other DACs, but Qutest sounds better without it. I would not recommend any "USB-decrapifiers" for Qutest, it`s USB input is good already. I would better save for cleaner source, like opticalRendu, or something like that.
> I don't think that there is a better DAC for this price. All other DACs that I wanted to try cost two or three times more than Qutest. And if I start looking for upgrade, my first option would be not a new DAC, but a Chord M Scaler.



Agree, agree, agree.
Its always better not to have a noisy source (like a computer) than to try and eliminate it afterwards.  Especially when the noise is high frequency which seems to permeate everything, parasitically induce across transformers (galvanic isolation) and from a high level perspective defy electrical basics. USB filters may catch some of it but the very filter itself will deform the 'digital' square and make the transceivers work harder and generate their own noise on the receiving end...


----------



## betula

I have ordered a Qutest. 

To my surprise the iFi iPurifier 3 improved clarity a lot with the 2Qute. Soon I will be able to test it with the Qutest. I am not expecting it to make as big of a difference as it does with the 2Qute but we shall see.

I've got the Pro iDSD here on loan, and it's DAC performance is absolutely impressive. It just controls the low-end so much better than 2Qute. It is also less bright and more dynamic. I just can't really go back to my 2Qute after the iDSD but I also can't afford to buy the iDSD and I wouldn't use 80% of its features anyway. 

I really hope the Qutest will cure my issues and bring a slightly less bright sound but a more firm and confident low-end control versus 2Qute. I will report back in a few days.


----------



## OctavianH

I have also an ISO Regen on the way and I will come back with pictures and impressions. On my short DAC list I have a new entry since yesterday when I had some time to read reviews, and the winner is RME ADI-2 DAC.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

OctavianH said:


> I have also an ISO Regen on the way and I will come back with pictures and impressions. On my short DAC list I have a new entry since yesterday when I had some time to read reviews, and the winner is RME ADI-2 DAC.


You want to change Qutest for ADI-2 or just buy another DAC for something else? I hardly believe that multifunctional dac-amp on AK4490 could stand up against single-function Chord DAC, but It would be interesting to hear your impressions.


----------



## MagnusH

OctavianH said:


> ...and the winner is RME ADI-2 DAC.


Have you compared it to Qutest or Hugo 2? I am thinking about this DAC as well, partly because I often listen to music at low levels and its volume-dependent and configurable loudness sounds like a great feature (and the other PEQ and DPS features don't hurt either).


----------



## OctavianH

It will not be a replacement but only an addition. I do not plan to sell my Qutest, the only DAC I am selling from Chord collection is 2Qute. Of course, I will come back with impressions, but it might take some time.


----------



## wongtonypr (Feb 2, 2019)

Hi everyone, my qutest has been damaged and I am trying to repair it. However one of the chip was burnt and therefore I cannot see the model of that chip. It would be very helpful that if anyone who own a qutest can open the case of their qutest and have a look at the model of that chip. Thanks a lot.


----------



## Triode User

OctavianH said:


> I have also an ISO Regen on the way and I will come back with pictures and impressions. On my short DAC list I have a new entry since yesterday when I had some time to read reviews, and the winner is RME ADI-2 DAC.



When you say . . “and the winner is”, is this based on you listening to it or is it just based on what you have read. I have been listening to an RME so I am interested to know.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

wongtonypr said:


> Hi everyone, my qutest has been damaged and I am trying to repair it. However one of the chip was burnt and therefore I cannot see the model of that chip. It would be very helpful that if anyone who own a qutest can open the case of their qutest and have a look at the model of that chip. Thanks a lot.


What happened to it?

P.S. Sorry, I can`t help with photo of internals. I`m on a trip and far from home.


----------



## wongtonypr

I think the qutest was accidentally short circuited and therefore result in burning one of the chip.


----------



## dac64

wongtonypr said:


> ...qutest was accidentally short circuited...



How?

I might be able to find time today to check for the chip code.


----------



## dac64 (Feb 2, 2019)

Enjoy!


----------



## dac64




----------



## dac64




----------



## dac64




----------



## dac64




----------



## dac64 (Feb 3, 2019)

I have  tried to locate the code and I couldn't find any!

I remembered that it's  a four layers  PCB...


----------



## dac64 (Feb 3, 2019)

Btw, there might be some improvements in the sound quality in this manner! 

This is because  those micro-vibrations were transferred from the Qutest to the symposium ultra platfrom via the blu tac in between


----------



## wongtonypr (Feb 3, 2019)

Thanks for your help, but can you also take a photo of the back of the electric board? The burnt chip that I made a red circle around in the picture is actually located at the back on the board. It would be nice if you can also have a close look at the chip to see what is the model of that chip. Thanks a lot.


----------



## dac64

wongtonypr said:


> Thanks for your help, but can you also take a photo of the back of the electric board? The burnt chip that I made a red circle around in the picture is actually located at the back on the board. It would be nice if you can also have a close look at the chip to see what is the model of that chip. Thanks a lot.



It's nothing there.


----------



## dac64

On the other side, "by rob"  

You are at the mercy of "rob"!


----------



## OctavianH

Triode User said:


> When you say . . “and the winner is”, is this based on you listening to it or is it just based on what you have read. I have been listening to an RME so I am interested to know.



Only based on reviews, I did not had the chance to listen to it.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Have an M Scaler on loan till Friday. Connected it to the setup and shall spend whatever time I can spare in the next few days to have a real listen (it's Chinese New Year period here).


----------



## dac64 (Feb 3, 2019)

dac64 said:


> ...This is because  those micro-vibrations were transferred from the Qutest to the symposium ultra platfrom via the blu tac in between



Oh! It did work! I guess  it's  because of the Qutest was tightly coupled to the symposium, so, all the micro-vibrations were drained away!

The images became solid and firmed,  better macro dynamics,  the separation of the depth was much clearer and deeper,  as if as a layer of fog was removed, and music was more coherent and natural flows.


----------



## dac64

Joe-Siow said:


> Have an M Scaler on loan till Friday...



Nice set up!


----------



## Joe-Siow

dac64 said:


> Nice set up!



Thanks!


----------



## miketlse

wongtonypr said:


> Hi everyone, my qutest has been damaged and I am trying to repair it. However one of the chip was burnt and therefore I cannot see the model of that chip. It would be very helpful that if anyone who own a qutest can open the case of their qutest and have a look at the model of that chip. Thanks a lot.


Have you contacted Chord customer support?
Surely the qutest must be still under warranty.


----------



## paulkwan

Lodwales81 said:


> hello all,
> Had my qutest now around 2 months and still fiddling around with the settings. One question is that I find tidal cd quality streaming sounds better than all my digital high res music files 24 bit and dsd.is there a reason for this, dsd just sounds quiet and lifeless for me all my music is played through Audirvana plus.



Hi I conclude with you. The best DSD playback SQ I got from Qutest is streaming Roon to dCS NB, enable DSD to PCM conversion, then SPDIF to Qutest, 2nd runner up is convert DSD to PCM before streaming to NB.


----------



## dac64

Some


miketlse said:


> Have you contacted Chord customer support?
> Surely the qutest must be still under warranty.



Some bought used; some bought overseas;  some misused...


----------



## nephilim32

Hello all. I have just a suggestion to share with you fine gents.
I bought a pair of LCD XC's and of course pairing it with my Qutest using mostly both Warm filters (orange, red) and I just love it .
Had to buy a closed back cause I have a small child, but with the LCD XC's very forward mid range and great low end presentation it makes for a very fun and engaging listen and kind of accentuates the qutest's amazing clarity in the mids and the quality of them because the XC's are so bloody uniquely forward in their mid range presentation . I love the pairing and I love my Qutest for helping my Xc's to sound like the elite closed back headphone that they truly are .
If anyone has tried this pairing let me know. Pretty wide sound stage for a closed back headphone.


----------



## Lodwales81

nephilim32 said:


> Hello all. I have just a suggestion to share with you fine gents.
> I bought a pair of LCD XC's and of course pairing it with my Qutest using mostly both Warm filters (orange, red) and I just love it .
> Had to buy a closed back cause I have a small child, but with the LCD XC's very forward mid range and great low end presentation it makes for a very fun and engaging listen and kind of accentuates the qutest's amazing clarity in the mids and the quality of them because the XC's are so bloody uniquely forward in their mid range presentation . I love the pairing and I love my Qutest for helping my Xc's to sound like the elite closed back headphone that they truly are .
> If anyone has tried this pairing let me know. Pretty wide sound stage for a closed back headphone.


i have a pair of beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones paired with a beyer A2 amp fed by my qutest, i cant hear any difference when changing the filters.


----------



## OctavianH

I just tried the ISO Regen, powered via a normal switching power supply because I did not had the LPS they sell with it, and the overall impression was that I got a bigger soundstage and more air in the overall presentation, at the cost of clarity and overall sound quality. I tried FLAC and DSD, several times, and I had the feeling that the improvement might be well perceived on a speaker system than on a headphone one like I use. So at the moment, at least in my case, the ISO Regen will go to the box until I will have another way to try it, on a different DAC or with a different power supply. For me it was not an improvement like it was the LPS I added in the past.


----------



## jwbrent

nephilim32 said:


> Hello all. I have just a suggestion to share with you fine gents.
> I bought a pair of LCD XC's and of course pairing it with my Qutest using mostly both Warm filters (orange, red) and I just love it .
> Had to buy a closed back cause I have a small child, but with the LCD XC's very forward mid range and great low end presentation it makes for a very fun and engaging listen and kind of accentuates the qutest's amazing clarity in the mids and the quality of them because the XC's are so bloody uniquely forward in their mid range presentation . I love the pairing and I love my Qutest for helping my Xc's to sound like the elite closed back headphone that they truly are .
> If anyone has tried this pairing let me know. Pretty wide sound stage for a closed back headphone.



I owned the XC when I had the original Hugo. I thought they paired well, too, but it took some time for the XC trebles to settle down a bit. Once done, there were many magical moments of listening other than with poorly mastered recordings.


----------



## HumanMedia (Feb 4, 2019)

paulkwan said:


> Hi I conclude with you. The best DSD playback SQ I got from Qutest is streaming Roon to dCS NB, enable DSD to PCM conversion, then SPDIF to Qutest, 2nd runner up is convert DSD to PCM before streaming to NB.



I am constantly frustrated by the affect of USB cables on the sound of the Qutest. You think you know the native sound of the Qutest then change the USB cable, and the sound changes. Across multiple cables there is a great quality common denominator in there, but USB cables all seem to impart some negative characteristic. What is the natural, neutral sound? How can I get this with a lowish cost USB cable?

I’m starting to think that abandoning playback of DSD256 and above, and returning to coax SPDIF. Is this it’s best performance? Yes I know many strongly recommend optical but then I lose DSD128(?) and DXD. That’s too far for me as I love my DXD titles. But coax SPDIF might be the ideal compromise. In fact I wonder if part of the M-Scalars charm is that it abandons USB connection to the DAC and uses coax SPDIF?


----------



## Jon L

HumanMedia said:


> I am constantly frustrated by the affect of USB cables on the sound of the Qutest... But coax SPDIF might be the ideal compromise.


IME, different spdif cables impart at least as large sonic differences as USB cables, so the frustration with cables causing sonic differences is unlikely to be resolved.  
Same goes for interconnects, headphone/speaker cables, power cables, etc, etc, the bane of audiophile existence...


----------



## HumanMedia

Jon L said:


> IME, different spdif cables impart at least as large sonic differences as USB cables, so the frustration with cables causing sonic differences is unlikely to be resolved.
> Same goes for interconnects, headphone/speaker cables, power cables, etc, etc, the bane of audiophile existence...




Hehe. Yes you are right. However in my experience all other cables including coax are far more predictable and really good quality is achievable at low prices. USB seems to defy this.


----------



## dc71

HumanMedia said:


> Hehe. Yes you are right. However in my experience all other cables including coax are far more predictable and really good quality is achievable at low prices. USB seems to defy this.



For my Qutest and system, the best USB cable I tried (Curious) beats the best spdif I tried (Shunyata Cobra). The Shunyata was a step up from other coax cables, optical and other USB cables, but couldn't match the CuriousUSB. It's possible that the separated power leg on the Curious is what makes the difference, so it may be worth trying a cheaper option with the same configuration. If you can afford it, go straight to the Curious as most people who try it consider it an end-game cable, possibly saving cash in the long run despite its expense


----------



## HumanMedia

dc71 said:


> For my Qutest and system, the best USB cable I tried (Curious) beats the best spdif I tried (Shunyata Cobra). The Shunyata was a step up from other coax cables, optical and other USB cables, but couldn't match the CuriousUSB. It's possible that the separated power leg on the Curious is what makes the difference, so it may be worth trying a cheaper option with the same configuration. If you can afford it, go straight to the Curious as most people who try it consider it an end-game cable, possibly saving cash in the long run despite its expense



Yes system related indeed - sincere thanks for the suggestion (keep em coming) I tried the Curious and returned it. I couldn’t stand it!? Sounded like it rolled off everything above 10K, and rolled off early in the bass, and put bloated sheen over everything in between. I so wanted it to work.

Ive tried Wireworlds, QEDs, Oyaides, Furutechs, Chords, Mapleshade, AudioQuest and a handful of other manufacturers and boutique brands, that I cant remember here at work and the good ones seem to have qualities that seem fine at first, but small annoying audio properties that I tolerate at first become so annoying I cant live with them over time. But only USB, other types of cables including coax and analog connectors I quickly find ones that work for me and happily keep them for years.

Oh one exception - I really liked the Uptone USBPC, despite its lack of bass I could live with it happily and did, but a change of equipment made using it physically impractical. Actually if i could combine the bass and mids from the Oyaide Class A, and the highs of the Uptone it would be perfect. Im sure we have all had thoughts of combing the good aspects of different products.

Anyways I tried the Curious, but if anyone else has USB suggestions for the Qutest please post them, they are all appreciated. Maybe a pattern of recommendations will emerge of USB cables that suite the Qutest more than not.


----------



## OctavianH

HumanMedia said:


> Anyways I tried the Curious, but if anyone else has USB suggestions for the Qutest please post them, they are all appreciated. Maybe a pattern of recommendations will emerge of USB cables that suite the Qutest more than not.



I use here for more than 6 months a QED Reference USB A-B and for me sounds perfect. You can try it.


----------



## mmwwmm

dac64 said:


>


Is the output stage in the Qutest a discrete class A stage or it uses some integrated operational amplifiers? I see a pair of OP07C close to the output. Just curious about that.


----------



## Rob Watts

It's a discrete class A OP stage. One feedback loop and the usual two caps and two resistors in the direct signal path. The OP07C are merely the analogue integrators for the digital DC servo; they are not in the audio path, and only influence the DC on the output. It takes 16 seconds to get DC to be nulled out by the digital servo, that's what is happening at power up during the rainbow display mode.


----------



## HumanMedia (Feb 5, 2019)

OctavianH said:


> I use here for more than 6 months a QED Reference USB A-B and for me sounds perfect. You can try it.



Really appreciate this recommendation and I will definitely follow up on it.

I also failed to mention that the USB Cable I am currently using is very interesting. It’s the Oyaide USB Class A (not the Class S which doesn’t sound as good) dirt cheap from pro-audio stores not consumer audio stores. It takes about 3 weeks to burn in, and the result is an enourmous soundstage wide and tall, with great bass extension and treble reach. It’s is clear and stunning in all respects except one - there is a narrow band of lower treble which has a metallic twang. Really metallic but only in a narrow frequency range. Many tracks you would never notice it and think its incredible, but when high hats are in that narrow problem spot, the illusion is destroyed. If it wasn’t for that one flaw it would easily be the best I have heard. Such a shame.

Will chase up on the QED, thanks.


----------



## nick77 (Feb 5, 2019)

Given the opportunity I would highly recommend a trial of the Wywires Platinum USB cable. I believe its strength is in the bass reproduction but nice balance overall, it is a bit pricey though. I got mine on sale.

*@ HumanMedia*


https://positive-feedback.com/revie...latinum-series-usb-and-aesebu-digital-cables/


----------



## Bill13

Rob,

You mentioned two caps in the direct signal path.  Are these two caps polypropylene, or other kind of high quality caps for audio?  
By "usual two caps" do you mean one cap used for the output stage's input, and the second cap used for the Qutest audio output (output stage to the RCA jacks).
If two caps are used in the audio path, do I understand correctly that a DC servo is not used to enable direct-coupled audio output for Qutest?

Thanks,  Bill



Rob Watts said:


> It's a discrete class A OP stage. One feedback loop and the usual two caps and two resistors in the direct signal path. The OP07C are merely the analogue integrators for the digital DC servo; they are not in the audio path, and only influence the DC on the output. It takes 16 seconds to get DC to be nulled out by the digital servo, that's what is happening at power up during the rainbow display mode.


----------



## Jon L

HumanMedia said:


> Really appreciate this recommendation and I will definitely follow up on it.
> Oyaide USB Class A ... when high hats are in that narrow problem spot, the illusion is destroyed. If it wasn’t for that one flaw it would easily be the best I have heard. Such a shame.



That's weird.  I would usually expect that kind of behavior from certain silver-plated copper USB cables.  Oyaide Class B is SPC; have you tried that one?  
It would be interesting to see if that problem goes away by using better quality USB connectors and/or solder...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Bill13 said:


> Rob,
> 
> You mentioned two caps in the direct signal path.  Are these two caps polypropylene, or other kind of high quality caps for audio?
> By "usual two caps" do you mean one cap used for the output stage's input, and the second cap used for the Qutest audio output (output stage to the RCA jacks).
> ...


Or maybe one in the input and one in the feedback loop?I'd like to know the type,also.


----------



## nephilim32

Lodwales81 said:


> i have a pair of beyerdynamic t1 g2 headphones paired with a beyer A2 amp fed by my qutest, i cant hear any difference when changing the filters.



Yikes!


----------



## nephilim32

jwbrent said:


> I owned the XC when I had the original Hugo. I thought they paired well, too, but it took some time for the XC trebles to settle down a bit. Once done, there were many magical moments of listening other than with poorly mastered recordings.



Watts up Jwbrent.  

I believe different methods of R&D have taken place in Audeze labs . 
They give you a certificate of authenticity and on the back it it says the headphone itself has been 'Burned in' and tested thoroughly before leaving the lab .
I really do believe them because these headphones with the updated drivers (2017) sound awesome right out of the box .
I have no issues and perhaps since my Qutest has quite a few miles put on it may have something to do with that .  
Anyhow. I absolutely love the pairing like you did .


----------



## betula

My initial impressions about the Qutest are that it exceeds my high expectations. (Replacing the 2Qute.)

I prefer the sound to the Pro iDSD. The pro iDSD sounds a bit thicker with a slightly more firm low-end, but the Qutest just offers a higher quality sound overall. The resolution is higher, it is more spacious, the background is darker. It is very airy, very detailed and very realistic sounding. Just gives a better insight to music.

Also, I can confirm that unlike the 2Qute, the Qutest doesn't benefit from the iPurifier 3.


----------



## jwbrent

nephilim32 said:


> Watts up Jwbrent.
> 
> I believe different methods of R&D have taken place in Audeze labs .
> They give you a certificate of authenticity and on the back it it says the headphone itself has been 'Burned in' and tested thoroughly before leaving the lab .
> ...



I bought the XC soon after it was released, so about five years ago. With the original Hugo which had a highly detail sound, there were times when the top end got hot. I can imagine with the newer XC and a Hugo 2, everything would sound just right. Enjoy!


----------



## jwbrent

betula said:


> My initial impressions about the Qutest are that it exceeds my high expectations. (Replacing the 2Qute.)
> 
> I prefer the sound to the Pro iDSD. The pro iDSD sounds a bit thicker with a slightly more firm low-end, but the Qutest just offers a higher quality sound overall. The resolution is higher, it is more spacious, the background is darker. It is very airy, very detailed and very realistic sounding. Just gives a better insight to music.
> 
> Also, I can confirm that unlike the 2Qute, the Qutest doesn't benefit from the iPurifier 3.



Interesting how there seems to be differing views about the effectiveness of the iPurifier 3 with the Qutest. I suppose the quality of the mains has something to do with this. When I had my house in the mountains of northern CA, I had an extra room devoted to my speaker system. I had an electrician come in to change the circuit to 20 amps, install hospital grade outlets, and create a dedicated line for my audio gear. Big difference because of this plus the fact I didn’t live in a city where all sorts of noise from industry and such pollutes the AC. Even still, my system which featured Watt/Puppy 7s and commensurate electronics sounded best late at night.


----------



## HumanMedia (Feb 5, 2019)

Jon L said:


> That's weird.  I would usually expect that kind of behavior from certain silver-plated copper USB cables.  Oyaide Class B is SPC; have you tried that one?
> It would be interesting to see if that problem goes away by using better quality USB connectors and/or solder...



Smells like silver plated copper to me as well. And that is also my experience with silver plating generally, although its usually a little more splashy and broader in effect and less metallic. Call me a heretic but I dont like silver at all in my system. Actually the metallic sound is more like rhodium IMO.

But it apparently isn’t...

Again really appreciate the USB suggestions from Qutest owners, specifically for the Qutest


----------



## Arniesb

OctavianH said:


> I just tried the ISO Regen, powered via a normal switching power supply because I did not had the LPS they sell with it, and the overall impression was that I got a bigger soundstage and more air in the overall presentation, at the cost of clarity and overall sound quality. I tried FLAC and DSD, several times, and I had the feeling that the improvement might be well perceived on a speaker system than on a headphone one like I use. So at the moment, at least in my case, the ISO Regen will go to the box until I will have another way to try it, on a different DAC or with a different power supply. For me it was not an improvement like it was the LPS I added in the past.


I would rather try something like Schiit Eitr to ingore usb completely. Simple Decrapifiers isnt enough. Im sure Galvanic isolation is needed too so Iso regen is good to go...
But the thing is, if people connect 2 different usb cables which 1 is low quality and other is high quality and expectations is to have performance of a high quality  cable im affraid its not gonna happen. Cheap usb cable always gonna degrade sound and i tried 5 on different combinations.
As we know power supply is even more important and these cheap switching supplies didnt make any sense for a product that is supposed to fight harsness.


----------



## dc71

HumanMedia said:


> Smells like silver plated copper to me as well. And that is also my experience with silver plating generally, although its usually a little more splashy and broader in effect and less metallic. Call me a heretic but I dont like silver at all in my system. Actually the metallic sound is more like rhodium IMO.
> 
> But it apparently isn’t...
> 
> Again really appreciate the USB suggestions from Qutest owners, specifically for the Qutest



Inakustik Reference would be another cable among the best. Solid scientific design elements and no voodoo from this German company.


----------



## HumanMedia

Also curious what other tweaks people employ for their Qutest?

Vibration control? (I have mine sitting on 3 Herbie tenderfeet)

Ferrites on USB input cable?

Physical distance from other (RF noisy) components?


----------



## Deftone

betula said:


> My initial impressions about the Qutest are that it exceeds my high expectations. (Replacing the 2Qute.)
> 
> I prefer the sound to the Pro iDSD. The pro iDSD sounds a bit thicker with a slightly more firm low-end, but the Qutest just offers a higher quality sound overall. The resolution is higher, it is more spacious, the background is darker. It is very airy, very detailed and very realistic sounding. Just gives a better insight to music.
> 
> Also, I can confirm that unlike the 2Qute, the Qutest doesn't benefit from the iPurifier 3.



You should really try optical with qutest, once i tried it there was no looking back.


----------



## Deftone

HumanMedia said:


> Also curious what other tweaks people employ for their Qutest?
> 
> Vibration control? (I have mine sitting on 3 Herbie tenderfeet)
> 
> ...



Unless all your music is DSD and 192khz+ then why go through all the trouble of usb clean up devices, ferrites, expensive usb cables. Optical is immune to noise, your getting a pure signal to the dac.


----------



## HumanMedia

Deftone said:


> Unless all your music is DSD and 192khz+ then why go through all the trouble of usb clean up devices, ferrites, expensive usb cables. Optical is immune to noise, your getting a pure signal to the dac.



Ive considered it, but I have a growing number of DSD256 and DXD (352khz PCM) titles which I have been playing a lot recently and would hate to lose them


----------



## Rob Watts

Bill13 said:


> Rob,
> 
> You mentioned two caps in the direct signal path.  Are these two caps polypropylene, or other kind of high quality caps for audio?
> By "usual two caps" do you mean one cap used for the output stage's input, and the second cap used for the Qutest audio output (output stage to the RCA jacks).
> ...



No they are not coupling capacitors at all; the Qutest is fully DC coupled with the digital DC servo nulling out DC offsets. The capacitors are for the analogue filter and are 200V COG types.


----------



## Jon L

HumanMedia said:


> Smells like silver plated copper to me as well. And that is also my experience with silver plating generally, although its usually a little more splashy and broader in effect and less metallic. Call me a heretic but I dont like silver at all in my system. Actually the metallic sound is more like rhodium IMO.



Well, seeing how the Oyaide class A is rather reasonably priced in the sea of money-grubbing audiophile USB cabledom, I have ordered one out of curiosity...


----------



## Bill13

Rob,
Glad to hear that no caps are used in the audio path that might effect audio quality. Yes, the DC-coupled output stage, with servo for zeroing DC offset, is the way to go.  Impressive.

BTW, Have two Qutests, and have an M-scaler on order.



Rob Watts said:


> No they are not coupling capacitors at all; the Qutest is fully DC coupled with the digital DC servo nulling out DC offsets. The capacitors are for the analogue filter and are 200V COG types.


----------



## jwbrent

HumanMedia said:


> Ive considered it, but I have a growing number of DSD256 and DXD (352khz PCM) titles which I have been playing a lot recently and would hate to lose them



Same here.


----------



## Qute Beats

nephilim32 said:


> Hello all. I have just a suggestion to share with you fine gents.
> I bought a pair of LCD XC's and of course pairing it with my Qutest using mostly both Warm filters (orange, red) and I just love it .
> Had to buy a closed back cause I have a small child, but with the LCD XC's very forward mid range and great low end presentation it makes for a very fun and engaging listen and kind of accentuates the qutest's amazing clarity in the mids and the quality of them because the XC's are so bloody uniquely forward in their mid range presentation . I love the pairing and I love my Qutest for helping my Xc's to sound like the elite closed back headphone that they truly are .
> If anyone has tried this pairing let me know. Pretty wide sound stage for a closed back headphone.


Nice!  Are they heavy?  I'd really love to try LCD and other 'phones, but nowhere on my local island of NI stocks a range of 'phones.. I rather enjoys my HD650s, but still keen to hear others.  Only way I can think of is to buy online on a sale or return basis.
So. to those who went down this route, who are decent UK retailers you's recommend?


----------



## Qute Beats

jwbrent said:


> Interesting how there seems to be differing views about the effectiveness of the iPurifier 3 with the Qutest. I suppose the quality of the mains has something to do with this. When I had my house in the mountains of northern CA, I had an extra room devoted to my speaker system. I had an electrician come in to change the circuit to 20 amps, install hospital grade outlets, and create a dedicated line for my audio gear. Big difference because of this plus the fact I didn’t live in a city where all sorts of noise from industry and such pollutes the AC. Even still, my system which featured Watt/Puppy 7s and commensurate electronics sounded best late at night.


I have iPurifier2, makes no difference with Qutest (worked well on previous DAC).  I bought iSilencer3 and find this does bring benefits with Qutest.  As it sits at the PC end it cleans signal before entering the cable, with my laptop it's worthwhile, and half the price of iPurifier.  Of course, others may have quieter PCs...


----------



## Lodwales81

I'm a little Concerned that I cannot hear any differnce when changing filters on my qutest, my Beyerdynamic T1 G2 headphones and beyerdynamic a2 amp aren't top end but neither are they lower end.


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

Lodwales81 said:


> I'm a little Concerned that I cannot hear any differnce when changing filters on my qutest, my Beyerdynamic T1 G2 headphones and beyerdynamic a2 amp aren't top end but neither are they lower end.


From what I understand the filters are very subtle in the change that they make. They aren't supposed to drastically change much of the sound, just a tiny bit of tuning. I can hear the difference between them, but it's small enough to just run incisive 24/7.


----------



## Lodwales81

Maybe remove my sotm sms USB and try direct optical, USB is much more sharp and bright


----------



## betula

Lodwales81 said:


> I'm a little Concerned that I cannot hear any differnce when changing filters on my qutest, my Beyerdynamic T1 G2 headphones and beyerdynamic a2 amp aren't top end but neither are they lower end.


I wouldn't worry too much, the difference between filters is _very_ subtle. Some people can't even hear it. Try songs you know very well, try to focus on brightness or treble and use the different filters to see if you hear a little more warmth or a little more rolled off treble. I can hear a very subtle difference when I switch between filters, but I doubt I would be able to tell which one is on in a blind test right after switching the Qutest on.


----------



## Lodwales81

betula said:


> I wouldn't worry too much, the difference between filters is _very_ subtle. Some people can't even hear it. Try songs you know very well, try to focus on brightness or treble and use the different filters to see if you hear a little more warmth or a little more rolled off treble. I can hear a very subtle difference when I switch between filters, but I doubt I would be able to tell which one is on in a blind test right after switching the Qutest on.


OK thanks for response, it's seems some qutest owners report that the filters make a huge difference but going by your reply it's very subtle. I mostly listen to tidal/quobuz so maybe if dsd 512 was the source filters would have a bigger effect.


----------



## MagnusH

I seem to recall Rob Watts saying that his DACs performs the same no matter the toslink source, which would mean that quality of toslink cables don't matter. Anyone compared some good toslink with some cheap ones?


----------



## nephilim32

Qute Beats said:


> Nice!  Are they heavy?  I'd really love to try LCD and other 'phones, but nowhere on my local island of NI stocks a range of 'phones.. I rather enjoys my HD650s, but still keen to hear others.  Only way I can think of is to buy online on a sale or return basis.
> So. to those who went down this route, who are decent UK retailers you's recommend?



650's are pretty awesome and I think you'll enjoy the XC's very much because they offer a completely different sonic presentation . I find it is great to get aquainted with a variety of sound signatures to find what you ultimately truly love. 
The XC's are heavy however with the updated headband they distribute that weight of 658 grams very well I feel . Also, the XC's build quality is beyond exceptional . they have an extremely imposing presence. Kind of remind me of the Juggernaut from Marvel x men comics. Lol . Very thick and chunky build. 
I think they are great . Very unique and forward midrange presentation .
If you ever hear them even with a Qutest you will get to understand that they are not a deep headphone that scrape the bottom of the nuance and transient barrels of every recording like a 650 or an 800 . however they are pretty wide for a closed back. Extreamly dynamic as well . The vocals and main instruments are extremely upfront along with a visceral bass presence. 

U.K dealer? Maybe CUSTOM CANS carries  them ? I bought a cable from them .
Great company.


----------



## Nejiro

Hello everyone, a curiosity for those like me who uses Foobar, what do you prefer to use as an output module, Asio or Wasapi? I am currently using Asio and ask if anyone has made comparisons and which one prefers between the two ...
Thank you


----------



## betula

Qute Beats said:


> Nice!  Are they heavy?  I'd really love to try LCD and other 'phones, but nowhere on my local island of NI stocks a range of 'phones.. I rather enjoys my HD650s, but still keen to hear others.  Only way I can think of is to buy online on a sale or return basis.
> So. to those who went down this route, who are decent UK retailers you's recommend?


Finding your ideal heapdhone is almost like an eternal quest. It is a fun journey though. If you don't need sound isolation I would definitely go for opened back headphones. Closed back is always a compromise, even if it is as good as as the Audeze XC. In my opinion even the LCD2C will give you a better experience than the HD650, for the fraction of the price of the XC. Of course it also depends on your music preference. HD650 might be better for mid-centric music but _nothing_ out there beats Audeze bass. The XC is also _very_ heavy. 20% heavier than the LCD2C and the 2C is already on the heavier side.

Although the name looks dodgy, this is a very well priced official Audeze retailer in the UK. You might find however that you prefer other brands to Audeze like ZMF, Focal or HiFiMan. 
I am very happy with my Audeze LCD2C, but have to admit excellent bass is mission critical with most of my preferred music.

And just to give this thread a little more vibe, here is my present setup. Qutest is awesome.


----------



## betula

Nejiro said:


> Hello everyone, a curiosity for those like me who uses Foobar, what do you prefer to use as an output module, Asio or Wasapi? I am currently using Asio and ask if anyone has made comparisons and which one prefers between the two ...
> Thank you


There is no real sonic difference between the two. For me Wasapi crashed a little less often than Asio.


----------



## Joe-Siow

So I've had a few days with the M Scaler in my setup and here's my take on the M Scaler.

The one word that I keep going back to is "effortless". The M Scaler is really a marvelous piece of engineering.

With it in the setup, the improvement is very noticeable and significant.
Resolution is better, soundstage depth is deeper, music flows better and is more effortless and refined as a result.
The improvement is especially more substantial if you listen to genres like Classical and Jazz and high res files.

YMMV


----------



## Hummer25

Joe-Siow said:


> So I've had a few days with the M Scaler in my setup and here's my take on the M Scaler.
> 
> The one word that I keep going back to is "effortless". The M Scaler is really a marvelous piece of engineering.
> 
> ...



Good to hear Joe, this is exactly my experience of the m-scaler although I have only heard one with DAVE. I presume the benefits are the same with Qutest? A Qutest +m-scarler at £4000 is half the price of DAVE but not half the audio experience. I would guess it gets you to about 70-80% of DAVE.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Hummer25 said:


> Good to hear Joe, this is exactly my experience of the m-scaler although I have only heard one with DAVE. I presume the benefits are the same with Qutest? A Qutest +m-scarler at £4000 is half the price of DAVE but not half the audio experience. I would guess it gets you to about 70-80% of DAVE.



I have heard the Dave on its own, but not with Blu2 or M Scaler and it has been quite a while since I last heard the Dave, so it's tough to compare it to M Scaler + Qutest combo.

I thoroughly enjoyed the experience of having the M Scaler in my setup and I'm very sorry to see it go back to the dealer later today.


----------



## FIOC

Rob Watts said:


> 1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue
> 
> When an M scaler is connected, the WTA1 filter is not used, and it is passed through to the 256 FS WTA 2 filter.



After reading Rob's signal path on page 37, I have some more specific questions regarding the signal paths of the 4 filter options, hope Rob and/or someone can help: 
(1) Do I get the entire above-mentioned signal path in Qutest only when I select the "Incisive Neutral HF roll-off" filter option (Green)?  

(2) If yes to (1) above, does the signal path for the "Incisive Neutral" filter option (white) look shorter like this below, skipping the 2048 FS filter and the pulse array noise shaper?
1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > analogue

(3) For "Warm" filter option and "Warm HF roll-off" filter option, do their signal paths look like below, respectively, both skipping the WTA 2 filter?  Do I hear more audible distortions (warmth) with these two filters?
1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > analogue
1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue

(4) I recently got Roon subscription, running the Roon Core on my NAS and feeding the signal to Qutest DAC via dCS Network Bridge.  I am still learning and evaluating Roon's upsampling function in the DSP engine.  Based on the signal paths discussed above, it seems to me that any source input over 352.8 kHz (1FS to 8FS input) is meaningless, as Qutest will do the upsampling beyond 8FS (352.8 kHz) through WTA1 filter anyway.  Did i understand this correctly?  

(5) Due to the limitation on dCS network bridge's SPDIF output (capped at 192kHz/16 bit), i am using Roon to upsample all PCM sources to either 176.4 or 192, which sounds good to me when combining with the "Incisive Neutral HF roll-off" filter option.  Am I doing this right to fit into the "1FS to 8FS input", or i should not upsample using Roon at all and just let the original sample rate, such as 44.1kHz, go directly into Qutest?  My ears cannot give me a definite answer, as the differences are not significant, and are hard to tell if the differences are "better" or "worse".  So want to hear some technical theories on this. 

Thanks!


----------



## Sound Eq (Feb 8, 2019)

hi everyone, can i ask in audirivana what settings do you use sox or izotope, and what settings did u dial in in either, can you please share

i played around with both, and do not know now what the defaults are anymore, can anyone also share the defaults for both


----------



## Nejiro

Excuse me a question about the M-Scaler, with the PCM files upsampling to 705.6 or 768 depending on the frequency of the file, with the DSD instead what does it bring them all to PCM 768? If for example I have a DSD256 "reduces" "to PCM 768?
Thank you


----------



## x RELIC x

FIOC said:


> (1) Do I get the entire above-mentioned signal path in Qutest only when I select the "Incisive Neutral HF roll-off" filter option (Green)?


No, you get the entire signal path with Green *and* White, but Green uses the HF filter where White does not.



FIOC said:


> 2) If yes to (1) above, does the signal path for the "Incisive Neutral" filter option (white) look shorter like this below, skipping the 2048 FS filter and the pulse array noise shaper?
> 1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > analogue


No, see above. Also, you can not bypass the Pulse Array DAC. It's the digital filter that is changed.



FIOC said:


> 3) For "Warm" filter option and "Warm HF roll-off" filter option, do their signal paths look like below, respectively, both skipping the WTA 2 filter? Do I hear more audible distortions (warmth) with these two filters?
> 1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > analogue
> 1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue


Not sure if you are hearing more distortions, but as I understand it the WTA2 filter is more accurate for reconstructing the signal, which is why the WTA1 is supposed to sound warmer / smoother. It's a timing difference that it changes, which can change timbre. Personally, on the Hugo2 I had a hard time hearing a difference between filters until I listened for timing and space in the music. If I just listened for a frequency response change I couldn't really tell them apart. it comes down to how one perceives it I suppose.



FIOC said:


> 4) I recently got Roon subscription, running the Roon Core on my NAS and feeding the signal to Qutest DAC via dCS Network Bridge. I am still learning and evaluating Roon's upsampling function in the DSP engine. Based on the signal paths discussed above, it seems to me that any source input over 352.8 kHz (1FS to 8FS input) is meaningless, as Qutest will do the upsampling beyond 8FS (352.8 kHz) through WTA1 filter anyway. Did i understand this correctly?


See below.



FIOC said:


> (5) Due to the limitation on dCS network bridge's SPDIF output (capped at 192kHz/16 bit), i am using Roon to upsample all PCM sources to either 176.4 or 192, which sounds good to me when combining with the "Incisive Neutral HF roll-off" filter option. Am I doing this right to fit into the "1FS to 8FS input", or i should not upsample using Roon at all and just let the original sample rate, such as 44.1kHz, go directly into Qutest? My ears cannot give me a definite answer, as the differences are not significant, and are hard to tell if the differences are "better" or "worse". So want to hear some technical theories on this.



Ideally, don't change the sampling rate from the original file and just feed Chord DACs bit perfect files at their original sampling rate. Rob has answered this 'technically' before (I can't find it), but it comes down to the WTA filters doing a better job than software upsamplers. Of course, if you prefer the sound of upsampling from Roon then that's what you should choose, but it won't be as accurate as the WTA filter, according to Rob.


----------



## FIOC

Thanks Relic!  Just to confirm I get it right...



x RELIC x said:


> No, you get the entire signal path with Green *and* White, but Green uses the HF filter where White does not



Is “HF filter” you mentioned = “3rd order 2048 FS filter” in Rob’s signal path?  Or HF filter is not showing in the signal path description at all?  



x RELIC x said:


> Not sure if you are hearing more distortions, but as I understand it the WTA2 filter is more accurate for reconstructing the signal, which is why the WTA1 is supposed to sound warmer / smoother. It's a timing difference that it changes, which can change timbre. Personally, on the Hugo2 I had a hard time hearing a difference between filters until I listened for timing and space in the music. If I just listened for a frequency response change I couldn't really tell them apart. it comes down to how one perceives it I suppose.



I remember seeing Rob commented before that other DACs do not bother to filter above 20khz so they are hearing more audible distortions; therefore, I was guessing if the two “Warm” filters indeed disable WTA2 filter, they essentially make Qutest similar to “other DACs”, which however makes sense as someone may like the distortion as it adds warmth (nothing wrong about it).  I could be wrong. 



x RELIC x said:


> Ideally, don't change the sampling rate from the original file and just feed Chord DACs bit perfect files at their original sampling rate. Rob has answered this 'technically' before (I can't find it), but it comes down to the WTA filters doing a better job than software upsamplers. Of course, if you prefer the sound of upsampling from Roon then that's what you should choose, but it won't be as accurate as the WTA filter, according to Rob.



Your opinion makes sense to me as I also believe less is more in audio.  My problem is that my ears cannot tell me “better” or “worse” by upsampling in Roon, but I always wonder why ppl are so into Roon upsampling, even including my hardcore local dealer who highly believes in dCS DACs but still recommends me using Roon upsampling (they are not pushing me to buy Nucleus) before dCS internal upsampling.  So I am afraid I am missing something there.  With that said, back to Rob’s signal path, isn’t what Roon upsampling is doing only limited to the “1FS to 8FS input” stage, but not intervening WTA1 or WTA2 at all which upsample the signal to very high frequency that Roon won’t be able to touch?  I have no doubt Qutest does better job in upsampling than Roon, if they both do upsampling for the same frequency range.  Based on the numbers showing and that I only upsample PCM to 176 or 192 in Roon, there seem to be no overlap in the signal path that Roon would distort Qutest’s internal upsampling.  Am I thinking the wrong way?


One more question - I went to a local dealer to try the M-Scaler over the past weekend.  I did not make appointment so I was only able to listen to the Hugo TT2 + M-Scaler combo with headphones.  Not sure if headphone cannot reveal all benefits, I honestly could not hear much difference between with and without M-Scaler.  Does M-Scaler only takes care of the “16FS WTA1 filter” in the signal path, and the Qutest DAC will take care of the remaining processing?  Since WTA2 filter is so important in recovering transients and timing, why not let M-Scaler take care of that step too?  

Does the WTA2 filter in Qutest also have 49,152 taps?  

Thanks!


----------



## x RELIC x (Feb 9, 2019)

FIOC said:


> Is “HF filter” you mentioned = “3rd order 2048 FS filter” in Rob’s signal path? Or HF filter is not showing in the signal path description at all?


The high frequency filter is just that, a filter added on top of the signal processing (like the crossfeed), and not the 2048FS filter.  Edit: Rob clarified that the HF filter alters the 2048FS, but doesn't bypass it, as outlined in a couple posts down the page - Link. Both Green and Red settings use the HF filter, while White and Orange do not.



FIOC said:


> I remember seeing Rob commented before that other DACs do not bother to filter above 20khz so they are hearing more audible distortions; therefore, I was guessing if the two “Warm” filters indeed disable WTA2 filter, they essentially make Qutest similar to “other DACs”, which however makes sense as someone may like the distortion as it adds warmth (nothing wrong about it). I could be wrong.


Yes, the Orange and Red settings disable the WTA2 stage, but I would say it's still very far from 'other DACs' just because of this. Rob said he included the different settings because he thought it would be interesting for people to hear the difference between just using WTA1 and using WTA1+WTA2. Again, this does not make it like other DACs as no other DAC uses a WTA (Watts Transient Aligned) filter. Again, Rob says it's perceived as warmer because it's less incisive in the timing and starting and stopping of notes, smoother/softer, which also affects timbre.




FIOC said:


> Your opinion makes sense to me as I also believe less is more in audio. My problem is that my ears cannot tell me “better” or “worse” by upsampling in Roon, but I always wonder why ppl are so into Roon upsampling, even including my hardcore local dealer who highly believes in dCS DACs but still recommends me using Roon upsampling (they are not pushing me to buy Nucleus) before dCS internal upsampling. So I am afraid I am missing something there. With that said, back to Rob’s signal path, isn’t what Roon upsampling is doing only limited to the “1FS to 8FS input” stage, but not intervening WTA1 or WTA2 at all which upsample the signal to very high frequency that Roon won’t be able to touch? I have no doubt Qutest does better job in upsampling than Roon, if they both do upsampling for the same frequency range. Based on the numbers showing and that I only upsample PCM to 176 or 192 in Roon, there seem to be no overlap in the signal path that Roon would distort Qutest’s internal upsampling. Am I thinking the wrong way?


Old habits die hard? I dunno and can't speak for others preferences, but I trust when Rob says don't upsample and muck with the file as his DACs upsample to a ridiculous amount anyway and do it very well compared to conventional upsamplers. He's written extensively on the topic.



FIOC said:


> One more question - I went to a local dealer to try the M-Scaler over the past weekend. I did not make appointment so I was only able to listen to the Hugo TT2 + M-Scaler combo with headphones. Not sure if headphone cannot reveal all benefits, I honestly could not hear much difference between with and without M-Scaler. Does M-Scaler only takes care of the “16FS WTA1 filter” in the signal path, and the Qutest DAC will take care of the remaining processing? Since WTA2 filter is so important in recovering transients and timing, why not let M-Scaler take care of that step too?


I wouldn't say that the M scaler is not suited for headphones as many people have reported great improvements with headphones using the M scaler. What headphones did you use?
As with all your questions it's best if you asked Rob about the WTA1 vs WTA2 filter. As I understand it the actual TAPs exist in WTA1 so the M scaler is replacing the 49,152 actual TAPs in the Qutest with 1 million TAPs in the M scaler.



FIOC said:


> Does the WTA2 filter in Qutest also have 49,152 taps?


AFAIK the WTA2 filter will add to the WTA1 actual TAPs of 49,152, so in a sense the answer is yes. Rob covered it at some point in one of his many posts.

You really should just read all of Rob's posts for a better understanding if you are curious about these details as I may be misquoting something. Or just ask him yourself.

Here is a quote I found for you that may help your understanding:



Rob Watts said:


> Moving on to the filter selection. Now providing the option of adjustable filters very much goes against my purist design philosophy; the 256 FS filter (white or green) is the technically more accurate filter, in that the reconstruction of transient timing is more accurate to the original analogue signal in the ADC, and in the past I would have simply given that. But I included the option for two reasons; firstly as it provides a simple way of getting yin-yang balance, even if we are using an inaccuracy to enable that, and that's OK so long as people are aware of that fact. When you get better headphones, then ideally the incisive filter options will be the best. The second reason was to demonstrate that actually very subtle technical differences can have a profound subjective effect. The technical difference between the 256 FS filter and 16 FS is very subtle; both options employ digital filtering up to 2048 FS, but the 16 FS option is just IIR filters (analogue type filter) and the 256 FS replaces the 16>256 IIR filter with a WTA filter (an FIR filter) which will re-construct the timing much more accurately. But the difference technically is very small. Note that conventional chip DAC's employ no filtering whatsoever above 8 FS or 16 FS (that's 384 kHz and 768 kHz max respectively).
> 
> Now although the technical difference is very small, to me the sound quality difference is very much not small. And it does sound very different to a normal WTA filter - you do not get the usual changes in sound quality, but you can perceive the starting and stopping of notes more easily - and because it's like snapping everything into focus, it sounds sharper and more incisive. When you can't hear the starting and stopping of notes, things sound soft and warm. Indeed, poor timing reconstruction is another way where you can soften up the sound - but again it's unnatural, as everything sounds soft, even sharp percussive effects that in real life sound sharp and fast.
> 
> To me the change is not small - so I was disappointed that a lot of posters were initially saying that they could not hear much of a change. Maybe I am a hyper-sensitive listener - or more likely the change is much more apparent when you are not doing AB tests, but are listening long term to music, and your brain has learnt about the better accuracy that Hugo 2 offers. But it's good to hear posters starting to report the change that I hear.


----------



## FIOC

Thanks again Relic!  I have no further questions on this, and will find time to read Rob’s posts.  

As far as the headphones used, the dealer first gave me Sennheizer HD 820 to listen, which however was very harsh on the highs.  So I requested an auduze LCD3, which was warmer but lacked transparency.  Anyway, I could not hear much benefit of M Scaler.


----------



## jacobacci

I have a Chord Hugo 2 and I am very happy with it.
Now I am considering getting a Chord Qutest to upgrade my second system. That system has active Piega P8LTD speakers. The setup I am considering is to set the Qutest to 1V output and then use Roon's digital volume control to adjust the volume. Is this setup likely to yield good results vs. having a dedicated preamp for volume control?


----------



## blueninjasix

jacobacci said:


> I have a Chord Hugo 2 and I am very happy with it.
> Now I am considering getting a Chord Qutest to upgrade my second system. That system has active Piega P8LTD speakers. The setup I am considering is to set the Qutest to 1V output and then use Roon's digital volume control to adjust the volume. Is this setup likely to yield good results vs. having a dedicated preamp for volume control?


I bought a Khozmo passive pre amp to use between Qutest and my SET power amps but I've recently removed it and use Foobar to attenuate the volume slightly (3db).  I think I get increased transparency this way. Oh how I wish the Qutest had digital volume control........


----------



## Rob Watts (Feb 9, 2019)

Just to clarify on @x RELIC x excellent replies (thanks you have saved me a lot of time today and many times in the past!) the HF filter isn't something added that's extra - and I often actually imply that by posting that one engages the HF filter - what actually happens is the time constants of the 2048FS filter is changed, not a signal path being switched. So with no HF filter the -3dB point of the 2048FS filter is 150 kHz; with the HF filter engaged it changes to 37.5 kHz.


----------



## Bill13 (Feb 9, 2019)

Haven't been able to find an answer to the following question, so maybe Rob Watts or somebody knowledgeable could answer:

I just received my new M-scaler today and connected it to my Qutest via supplied dual-BNC cables..

I'm playing music DVDs (44 kHz sample rate CD player is connected to the M-scaler *BNC 1 input* connector).
The M-scaler is connected to my Qutest DAC using dual-BNC connection for the 705kHz sample rate (only the* dual-BNC input to Qutest* at 705 kHz sample rate can utilize the full 1 million M-scaler taps).

For the Qutest dual-BNC input connection, the input led-light button is *blue* color.  Problem is, the Qutest user manual has no documentation on how to determine that the dual-bnc input SR is either 705 kHz (for 1M taps) or 352.8 kHz for only 1/2 million taps  (Qutest manual not does not mention* input button blue color* for dual-BNC input selection).  Only YELLOW and RED button colors for Qutest BNC 1 & 2 inputs are mentioned in the manual.

Is this *blue color input button light* for dual-BNC 705 kHz input SR an undocumented feature of Qutest? - or is there something wrong with my Qutest?


----------



## x RELIC x

Rob Watts said:


> Just to clarify on @x RELIC x excellent replies (thanks you have saved me a lot of time today and many times in the past!) the HF filter isn't something added that's extra - and I often actually imply that by posting that one engages the HF filter - what actually happens is the time constants of the 2048FS filter is changed, not a signal path being switched. So with no HF filter the -3dB point of the 2048FS filter is 150 kHz; with the HF filter engaged it changes to 37.5 kHz.



Thanks Rob for the clarification!


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Bill13 said:


> For the Qutest dual-BNC input connection, the input led-light button is *blue* color.  Problem is, the Qutest user manual has no documentation on how to determine that the dual-bnc input SR is either 705 kHz (for 1M taps) or 352.8 kHz for only 1/2 million taps  (Qutest manual not does not mention* input button blue color* for dual-BNC input selection).  Only YELLOW and RED button colors for Qutest BNC 1 & 2 inputs are mentioned in the manual.
> 
> Is this *blue color input button light* for dual-BNC 705 kHz input SR an undocumented feature of Qutest? - or is there something wrong with my Qutest?


Color of input button shows which input is active. Color of light behind the viewing glass indicates sample rate (352.8, 705 etc.). That`s how I understand Qutest manual.


----------



## Bill13

Ragnar-BY said:


> Color of input button shows which input is active. Color of light behind the viewing glass indicates sample rate (352.8, 705 etc.).



You think that I didn't read the manual?  You didn't answer my question.
For dual-BNC input the color of my Qutest input button is *blue*.  Blue is not a color the input button should display according to the manual. The Qutest manual says that the four different colors the input button can display are:  _*white, green, yellow and red*_.  *Not blue*, which is the color I'm concerned about.

The display port viewing glass does show purple for 705.6 kHz which is correct for a 44kHz input to the M-scaler and 705kHz output over dual-BNC connectors - - but that's not what I'm asking about.


----------



## dac64

For those  US residents, have to tightly  coupled chord to new/used right size symposium ultra platform using blue tack, not more than 3mm diameter at four corners and follow  instructions carefully. And remember to remove the original footers.


It will bring the chord to next level.

Of course, you don't have to place the  chord up side down. :; This is because I have the intenson to replace qutest with tt2.


----------



## FIOC

Rob Watts said:


> Yes traditional SPDIF receivers are not good at recovering the SPDIF and creating a clock, as they rely on an analogue PLL - and the data itself modulates the clock, so you get signal correlated jitter which is extremely audible. But my SPDIF receiver is all digital, and relies upon the low jitter local clock, and does not create signal correlated jitter. The SPDIF receiver creates I2S data, with zero signal correlated jitter; plus a word clock, exactly as if it was transmitted via a real I2S connection.
> 
> But, the word clock - whether from a direct I2S or SPDIF, still will have source jitter. And this must be eliminated - and that is the job of my DPLL, which completely eliminates any source jitter. So there is absolutely no benefit in using I2S, so no need to go to the complexity of HDMI - the video noise would cause extra problems to worry about too.



Hi Rob, sorry for picking up on what you said a year ago, as I found this clock topic very interesting and could potentially save me a lot of money.  

My current signal path is:
Synology NAS (storing my library and running Roon Core) > Ethernet > dCS Network Bridge > single SPDIF RCA out with a BNC adapter into > Chord Qutest > preamp > power amp

I have been concerning the SPDIF connection between dCS NB and Qutest, as I also read SPDIF degrades SQ because the source (in my case the dCS NB) controls the clock, not the DAC.  Plus that I cannot fully utilize Roon’s RAAT framework that allows the DAC to control the clock for the entire digital signal path, as Roon can only recognize my dCS NB but not Qutest due to the SPDIF connection, not to mention that the SPDIF output from dCS NB caps at 192/24 and DSD64.  Also the RCA to BNC adapter may degrade SQ too.  So I feel that I have wasted the potential of both equipments and have been itching to buy the new dCS Bartók streaming DAC to replace the NB+Qutest combo.  

However, based on what you said above, it seems to me that no matter how good or how bad the dCS NB handles the clock, or how bad the SPDIF connection mess it up, it doesn’t really matter as Qutest will eliminate any source jitter from the streamer anyway.  Am I interpreting what you said into my setup correctly?  

What would be your guess or understanding on dCS’s SPDIF implementation on the Network Bridge?  Does the RCA to BNC adapter degrade SQ technically?

Putting the DAC quality aside, do you think replacing the dCS NB + Qutest combo with a 2-in-1 streaming DAC (Bartók in this case) would improve SQ?  I heard the streaming section inside Bartók connects to the DAC section via I2S, which is superior to SPDIF and in that case Roon can see the DAC section too. 

Also speaking out loud and this might be a very stupid question - can I custom order a pair of Coaxial cables, terminated with AES on the source end and with BNC on the DAC end, so that I can use dCS NB’s best output and Qutest’s best input, in order to eliminate the restrictions and improve SQ?  Impedance mismatch could be an issue...

Thanks Rob or any experienced user who can help me understand all these!


----------



## Rob Watts

Bill13 said:


> Haven't been able to find an answer to the following question, so maybe Rob Watts or somebody knowledgeable could answer:
> 
> I just received my new M-scaler today and connected it to my Qutest via supplied dual-BNC cables..
> 
> ...



No Blue is correct on the input (it's actually cyan) it indicates that dual data on the BNCs, so you know that the M scaler is giving you the 1M taps for sure.



FIOC said:


> Hi Rob, sorry for picking up on what you said a year ago, as I found this clock topic very interesting and could potentially save me a lot of money.
> 
> My current signal path is:
> Synology NAS (storing my library and running Roon Core) > Ethernet > dCS Network Bridge > single SPDIF RCA out with a BNC adapter into > Chord Qutest > preamp > power amp
> ...



Technically USB is better from the clock POV; but in practice I have had optical sound identical to USB, so that proves that my DPLL is capable of removing all source jitter completely - which of course I see from my jitter measurements anyway.

I can't comment on your sources, as I have no experience on them; but in my experience, assuming bit perfect data, the source can only change the sound by adding RF noise into the DAC. And the less complex the source, and the lower power it consumes, then the better resulting sound quality - this is my technical understanding, and it's backed up by all the source listening tests I have done.


----------



## Bill13

Rob Watts said:


> No Blue is correct on the input (it's actually cyan) it indicates that dual data on the BNCs, so you know that the M scaler is giving you the 1M taps for sure.
> 
> Thanks, it's a relief to read that 'blue' (actually cyan) is OK after all ..  perhaps the Qutest manual could be updated/corrected: input button displays cyan color for the dual-BNC input?


----------



## FIOC

Rob Watts said:


> Technically USB is better from the clock POV; but in practice I have had optical sound identical to USB, so that proves that my DPLL is capable of removing all source jitter completely - which of course I see from my jitter measurements anyway.



The issue i have is that the dCS NB does not have a USB output, otherwise I would use USB to connect the two to eliminate all my concerns.  dCS was in the process of adding USB output but in late 2018 they abandoned it due to some technical imperfection, which disappointed me a lot.  I cannot use optical either, because dCS NB doesn't have optical output.  So SPDIF is my only option.  

You said "optical sound identical to USB" on Qutest, but how about the BNC input?  Does it also sound identical to USB?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Bill13 said:


> You think that I didn't read the manual?  You didn't answer my question.



Chill man. U don't have to be an a**hole about it


----------



## Bill13

I could have been more tactful - I apologize.  At the time I was frustrated by my problem with Qutest dual-BNC input from M-scaler. 
Rob Watts (thankfully) answered the undocumented (user manual) input selector blue/cyan color button problem.


Joe-Siow said:


> Chill man. U don't have to be an a**hole about it


----------



## 211276

This has come up at the right time for me as I have had the Mscaler on loan for the past few days. The yellow input light was on and i was not aware that the 1M taps was not activated. I just discovered that one of the connections was not inserted firmly enough. Now it is and the light is cyon. There was a significant improvement at .5M taps and i cant wait to use it at 1M taps. Definately a keeper. I think the Qutest manual needs to be updated though.


----------



## betula

I have noticed that in the first hour of my listening I prefer the white filter. As time goes on however, the warm HF roll of filter tends to be my choice. It is a bit easier on the ear but still extremely satisfying. Am I alone here enjoying the warm HF roll off filter? Most folks seem to settle down with either the white or the warm filter. Not much information about the 4th filter.


----------



## 211276

I prefer mine with the green filter.


----------



## dac64 (Feb 11, 2019)

...


----------



## dac64

betula said:


> I have noticed that in the first hour of my listening I prefer the white filter...



I left it white from day one, and fine tuning the rest of the system.


----------



## FIOC

dac64 said:


> ...



Unfortunately dCS NB’s dual BNC outputs are SDIF-2 interface, which is an old standard but still popular in Japan per dCS.  SDIF-2 seems to have a lot of restrictions, including that the PCM output is maxed at 96kHz on NB, not sure why dCS includes it on the NB.   Since the dual BNC input on Qutest is S/PDIF, I am not sure if it can even accept SDIF-2 output.  Plus capping at 96kHz, there doesn’t seem to be motivation for me to use SDIF-2.   

However, please let me know if I misunderstood SDIF-2, or this interface on NB can actually output higher sample rate than 96/24.  Thanks dac64!


----------



## FIOC

FIOC said:


> Unfortunately dCS NB’s dual BNC outputs are SDIF-2 interface, which is an old standard but still popular in Japan per dCS.  SDIF-2 seems to have a lot of restrictions, including that the PCM output is maxed at 96kHz on NB, not sure why dCS includes it on the NB.   Since the dual BNC input on Qutest is S/PDIF, I am not sure if it can even accept SDIF-2 output.  Plus capping at 96kHz, there doesn’t seem to be motivation for me to use SDIF-2.
> 
> However, please let me know if I misunderstood SDIF-2, or this interface on NB can actually output higher sample rate than 96/24.  Thanks dac64!



https://www.dcsltd.co.uk/support/what-is-an-sdif-2-interface/

dCS seems to say that SDIF-2 is not compatible with S/PDIF, but SDIF is still coaxial cable at 75ohm.  I am very confused.  Hope they work...


----------



## dac64

FIOC said:


> https://www.dcsltd.co.uk/support/what-is-an-sdif-2-interface/
> 
> dCS seems to say that SDIF-2 is not compatible with S/PDIF, but SDIF is still coaxial cable at 75ohm.  I am very confused.  Hope they work...



Incompatible because chord dual bnc is AES3 standard and the website said no.


----------



## FIOC

dac64 said:


> Incompatible because chord dual bnc is AES3 standard and the website said no.



Does that mean on Qutest when using single BNC input it is SPDIF, but when connecting dual BNC it becomes AES3?

Is the dual BNC output / SDIF-2 on NB essentially S/PDIF?


----------



## dac64

FIOC said:


> Does that mean on Qutest when using single BNC input it is SPDIF, but when connecting dual BNC it becomes AES3?
> 
> Is the dual BNC output / SDIF-2 on NB essentially S/PDIF?



1. Yes, the qutest is able to auto detect single or dual bnc inputs, and perform according. 

2. I can't answer this question.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Bought a Russ Andrews X6 Mains Block. It`s a mains block with filter for mains noise.









I was skeptical about this at first and bought it only because of Russ`s 60-day money-back policy. After plugging in my Qutest and V200 it took me 20 seconds to decide to keep it. Everything sounds clearer and less bright. Highs became more liquid and smooth. I can`t say what was affected more - the amp, or the Qutest, but the final result is great.

I have an Entech mains noise analyzer. Not rocket science tech, but it is useful for comparing mains outlets and filters like this. Entech showed me that X6 lowers the mains noise in my apartment by 20-30 times. I think the mains noise might be an issue, why aftermarket LPSUs are so popular. Capacitors used in "audiophile PSUs" filter noise, so it might be hearable in some locations, and not hearable in others.

P.S. Just for fun I`ve also made "audiophille power cords" with large twisted conductors for X6 and my amp. But I don`t think it was the real reason of better sound.


----------



## Sage Encore

OctavianH said:


> I just tried the iFi iPurifier (1st gen) with Qutest (remembered I had one at my office and brought it back home just to try it). The impression was not very good, since it did not improved the sound, but somehow made it loose the dynamics and sound more "flat". What to say, I do not recommend this device. Did anyone had a different impression? I tried some FLAC 16/44.1 here, so nothing fancy.


I did the same thing as well and I concur with your findings. In fact my ifi Nano USB 3.0 is also out of the chain after I upgraded to soTm gear. They are up for sale now.


----------



## Sunya

Herb Reichert has a good follow up on the Qutest in the Stereophile March issue.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Sunya said:


> Herb Reichert has a good follow up on the Qutest in the Stereophile March issue.


Αwesome!What are his conclusions?


----------



## Sunya

_Compared to any DAC I know, the Qutest seemed to recast the body of music it reproduces. With every recording and every filter, I experienced the same menu of enjoyable effects: vivid, layered detail; sinewy density; and a tangible force that moved music forward naturally. I enjoyed these effects so much I was disarmed. It made me question my knowledge and expectations. Was what I experienced real? Can it be measured? Or is it simply some illusion Rob Watts has programmed into his fancy FPGAs?

Chord’s Qutest made my other DACs sound strangely tentative. The Qutest had more vivo, tiny detail, and jump factor than Schiit’s Yggdrasil Analog 2. It sounded more vivid and present—but not as natural or as transparent—as my primary reference DAC, the HoloAudio Spring. It had a denser verity than the Mytek Brooklyn. Overall, the Qutest sounded most like the last DAC I reviewed, iFi Audio’s Pro iDSD—but punchier, more natural, more refined.

Overall, the Chord Qutest delivered blizzards of detail, and a weighty musicality that completely captivated my mind. It stimulated me in a way that suggested it might be doing something unusually right in the time domain. Something seemed musically correct in a way that’s new to me. But why? Now I’ll go back and read JA’s review—it will be interesting to see what his listening observations and measurements reveal. Meanwhile, the Chord Qutest is a must-audition for every serious audiophile—especially those who think all DACs sound the same. _*Herb Reichert*


----------



## Deftone

Ive also wondered why there is more weight with chord dacs, whats going on in the bass thats different?


----------



## audiobill

Chord Qutest review on AudioStream with Rob Watts interview - https://www.audiostream.com/content/chord-qutest-dac-review


----------



## paulkwan

Joe-Siow said:


> It has been a very interesting discussion on the various inputs and also USB enhancement devices
> 
> I took the afternoon to experiment with the Uptone ISO Regen in and out of my setup to see if I can hear any noticeable difference
> 
> ...





Joe-Siow said:


> Also, a subject that has the horse almost flogged to death; PSU.
> 
> My upgraded Uptone LPS-1.2 replacement for a dead LPS-1 arrived yesterday.
> Just out of curiosity, I plugged it to the Qutest today.
> ...



ISO Regen and LPS-1.2 work great with my Qutest too !


----------



## 486930

My budget doesn't allow for a streamer right now so I'm connecting an iPad to my Qutest. I would really like to ditch the cable adapter from Apple. Is there a way, preferably a single cable, to connect an iPad to the Qutest? So something like Lightning to USB-B?


----------



## wongtonypr

dac64 said:


> It's nothing there.



It should be this place, I have took out the damaged burnt chip already. Can another have a closed look on the chip of their qutest  to see what is the model of that chip so that I can purchase one to replace it?


----------



## dac64 (Feb 15, 2019)

...


----------



## dac64

wongtonypr said:


> It should be this place, I have took out the damaged burnt chip already. Can another have a closed look on the chip of their qutest  to see what is the model of that chip so that I can purchase one to replace it?



The picture in your previous indicated wrong location.


----------



## OctavianH

I'll add soon on my line a second source (via Optical) except my PC (FLAC), a *Cambridge Audio CXC* transport. Does anyone have experience with this one? Any impressions related to optical input of Qutest or sound quality vs the USB input from a PC?


----------



## wongtonypr

dac64 said:


> The picture in your previous indicated wrong location.


I am sorry about that, i have used the wrong photo I think. This is a photo of the burnt chip that was removed.


----------



## OctavianH

Yep. Source matters, as anyone would guess. A decent CD transport like Cambridge Audio CXC via Optical sounds better than a normal PC via USB. The cable I added is QED Reference Quartz and looks very good. The sound is more coherent and maybe a little bit darker, with more bass, and you do not hear that kind of "wrong compression" like on the USB when playing FLAC files. It was a good choice for Qutest.


----------



## DjBobby (Feb 16, 2019)

OctavianH said:


> Yep. Source matters, as anyone would guess. A decent CD transport like Cambridge Audio CXC via Optical sounds better than a normal PC via USB. The cable I added is QED Reference Quartz and looks very good. The sound is more coherent and maybe a little bit darker, with more bass, and you do not hear that kind of "wrong compression" like on the USB when playing FLAC files. It was a good choice for Qutest.


How does the beer affect the sound?


----------



## OctavianH

The beer is not affecting the sound but it's raising the morale of the listener.


----------



## nephilim32

OctavianH said:


> Yep. Source matters, as anyone would guess. A decent CD transport like Cambridge Audio CXC via Optical sounds better than a normal PC via USB. The cable I added is QED Reference Quartz and looks very good. The sound is more coherent and maybe a little bit darker, with more bass, and you do not hear that kind of "wrong compression" like on the USB when playing FLAC files. It was a good choice for Qutest.



Yup. CD transport all the way . In my experience its better than any computer based audio set up I've ever heard weather streaming or straight from a laptop using hard files . For me, it's the transients . Good quality cd transports are better time keepers. I love my Cyrus CDi with its own intelligent Power supply. Such an integral part of my system. 
Anyway . I think you have the right idea .Have a great time . Cheers!


----------



## Deftone

OctavianH said:


> Yep. Source matters, as anyone would guess. A decent CD transport like Cambridge Audio CXC via Optical sounds better than a normal PC via USB. The cable I added is QED Reference Quartz and looks very good. The sound is more coherent and maybe a little bit darker, with more bass, and you do not hear that kind of "wrong compression" like on the USB when playing FLAC files. It was a good choice for Qutest.



I have that reference quartz cable as well, i really like the spring mechanism at the connectors.


----------



## dac64

wongtonypr said:


> I am sorry about that, i have used the wrong photo I think. This is a photo of the burnt chip that was removed.



CO1


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

So far after around two months of owning the Qutest I’m finding that I prefer the USB interface to the Optical interface. Here is my story of how I came to my _personal _conclusion:

Initially I found the USB interface to be lacking. The sound was a little bit smeared and a smidge flat. I was using a variety of USB cables that I found around the house to hook the Qutest up to my PC. 

One day I decided to test out the Optical interface on the Qutest with an Optical cable going to my PC. The result rendered a more lively sound from the Qutest, one that I’ve read about throughout this thread.

Next, I decided to build a small Intel NUC streamer. The problem with the NUC is that it doesn’t have an Optical interface. So I figured I’d give USB one last shot and order a higher quality cable.

I ended up with the Oyaide Neo S USB cable. I was extremely skeptical about any sort of improvement from changing USB cables. In fact I had my finger hovering over the return button the entirety of the time I waited for the Oyaide Neo S to arrive. But curiosity prevailed in this case and luckily so.

Upon hooking up the Oyaide Neo S to the USB interface of both the Qutest and my Intel NUC I heard a very similar quality to the Optical interface that I had tested before, the cable worked! The only sound difference now between USB and Optical was extremely minimal.

“But you said USB was better!” shouts the guy from the back. Yep, notice how I said there was a minimal difference between Optical and USB? I believe the USB interface has the smallest amount of smoothness that makes it a little more sweet to listen to. The Optical has more edge to it.   I know they are probably damn near identical in sound characteristics but for some reason I enjoy the USB sound. It could just be a personal bias too!


----------



## OctavianH

I tried in the last days the optical and USB and for me they do not sound in the same way. But first to explain the environment: 
1) source 1 is a PC with Foobar and ASIO where I play FLAC files, connected to Qutest via a 3m QED Reference USB A-B cable
2) source 2 is a CXC (CD transport), connected to Qutest via a 1m QED Reference Quartz optical cable
Both inputs are connected at the same time, and I switch the input via the button. Qutest is connected via RCA to a tube Amp.
I tried the same CD in the CXC from which I encoded the FLAC files. So we have the same album, the same DAC and the same AMP and I use the same headphones (T1.2).
Normally, we would expect to have minimal differences, and almost the same sound on both, right? But for me the optical input sounds darker than the USB. And the difference is not subtle.
So I guess the only difference can be the jitter on USB, since the optical has to be "isolated" from the electrical interference. 
Other factor might be that the PC is plugged in a normal power outlet while the CXC is plugged (alongside the tube amp) in a Furman power conditioner which has to provide a better AC filtering than for the PC.
If I am wrong in my assumptions please correct me. Anyone tried such an 1:1 test with COAX?


----------



## naynay

OctavianH said:


> I tried in the last days the optical and USB and for me they do not sound in the same way. But first to explain the environment:
> 1) source 1 is a PC with Foobar and ASIO where I play FLAC files, connected to Qutest via a 3m QED Reference USB A-B cable
> 2) source 2 is a CXC (CD transport), connected to Qutest via a 1m QED Reference Quartz optical cable
> Both inputs are connected at the same time, and I switch the input via the button. Qutest is connected via RCA to a tube Amp.
> ...


You need to test using same source otherwise this confirms nothing.


----------



## OctavianH

naynay said:


> You need to test using same source otherwise this confirms nothing.



I understand, but the only way to do this is to add a PCI sound card to the PC or to use the integrated sound card via optical out. Normally the CXC is only a transport, so just "reads bits" and sends them to the Qutest. If we assume FLAC is lossless, it has to sound identical to the CD. I will try to see if I play the same FLAC file via the PC on optical and USB and check if we still have the same difference.


----------



## x RELIC x

OctavianH said:


> I tried in the last days the optical and USB and for me they do not sound in the same way. But first to explain the environment:
> 1) source 1 is a PC with Foobar and ASIO where I play FLAC files, connected to Qutest via a 3m QED Reference USB A-B cable
> 2) source 2 is a CXC (CD transport), connected to Qutest via a 1m QED Reference Quartz optical cable
> Both inputs are connected at the same time, and I switch the input via the button. Qutest is connected via RCA to a tube Amp.
> ...



It’s not the jitter on the USB for 2 reasons. One, the USB timing is asynchronous, meaning the timing comes from the DAC so there should be zero jitter. Two, Rob’s designs are jitter immune on all inputs due to the Pulse Array design. Likely you are hearing the difference from RF noise being injected in to the analogue components with USB making it sound brighter. As you rightly mentioned the optical is electrically isolated so does not transmit the RF noise so this is the most likely reason why it sounds darker, as Rob has explained many times.


----------



## naynay

OctavianH said:


> I understand, but the only way to do this is to add a PCI sound card to the PC or to use the integrated sound card via optical out. Normally the CXC is only a transport, so just "reads bits" and sends them to the Qutest. If we assume FLAC is lossless, it has to sound identical to the CD. I will try to see if I play the same FLAC file via the PC on optical and USB and check if we still have the same difference.


https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07B46KQVP/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00__o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Add that to your PC for optical out great piece of kit for the money.


----------



## OctavianH

x RELIC x said:


> It’s not the jitter on the USB for 2 reasons. One, the USB timing is asynchronous, meaning the timing comes from the DAC so there should be zero jitter. Two, Rob’s designs are jitter immune on all inputs due to the Pulse Array design. Likely you are hearing the difference from RF noise being injected in to the analogue components with USB making it sound brighter. As you rightly mentioned the optical is electrically isolated so does not transmit the RF noise so this is the most likely reason why it sounds darker, as Rob has explained many times.



And the analogue components are... the tube amp? Which is common to both scenarios. What analogue components are injecting RF noise?


----------



## x RELIC x (Feb 20, 2019)

OctavianH said:


> And the analogue components are... the tube amp? Which is common to both scenarios. What analogue components are injecting RF noise?



No, the source is injecting noise in to the DAC. A DAC (Digital to *Analogue *Converter) outputs an analogue signal and has analogue components. Optical isolates RF noise as it isn’t an electrical transmition and has been said to sound smoother and darker. It is the reference one should try for when comparing digital inputs (at least with Chord DACs).

Edit: A digital signal simply means sampled data. The transmition of digital signals is still analogue in nature. USB it’s Voltage down a wire. Optical it’s pulses of light. The Voltage down a wire can also carry extraneous electrical noise not intended in the sampled data. This causes noise floor modulation  in the analogue components of the DAC which brightens the sound giving a false sense of detail. This is why optical is the preferred connection and potentially can sound darker in comparison, because it does not cause noise floor modulation from electrical RF noise.


----------



## Triode User

x RELIC x said:


> It’s not the jitter on the USB for 2 reasons. One, the USB timing is asynchronous, meaning the timing comes from the DAC so there should be zero jitter. Two, Rob’s designs are jitter immune on all inputs due to the Pulse Array design. Likely you are hearing the difference from RF noise being injected in to the analogue components with USB making it sound brighter. As you rightly mentioned the optical is electrically isolated so does not transmit the RF noise so this is the most likely reason why it sounds darker, as Rob has explained many times.



Agreed with all that.

Just to add to what you say, for test purposes I would suggest not having the other device / cable plugged in whilst listening to optical because it might still be infecting the system with RF even though not selected on the DAC inputs. Physically disconnecting the cable removes any element of doubt.

And don't forget that any RF noise can travel in the groundplane and hence why the best source is often referenced by Rob to be his mains disconnected battery powered laptop with optical out. Just using optical out from a mains powered device may not be total isolation.


----------



## OctavianH

Understood, many thanks for explanations everyone.


----------



## Sray (Feb 21, 2019)

Hi,

The thread is a bit too long and I am not sure if anyone pairs Qutest with Benchmarkmedia HPA4??
Couple weeks ago, I purchased Qutest from online shop (autherised local dealer) and connected it to HPA4 in my main system:
(Intel NCU -> USB -> Qutest -> RCA cable -> HPA4 -> AHB2 -> Thiel CS2.4).
                                                                           |
                                                                            --> Grado PS500
After break-in for couple days, the sound of Qutest opens up. It matches my taste and I love it.
I usually disconnect the 5V power before I go to bed. But, couple days later, when I turn on my system, I hear loud noise appear in my system (music can be heard but covered by loud noise). In the beginning, I thought it was software problem. But, I tried everything including driver re-installation, cable replacement (USB and RCA) and swap 5V power from mobile battery to LPS-1. Nothing helps. So, I returned it and get a new one, again, same situation happens.

I start suspecting it is some kind of setup issue and might damage qutest!?. I tried to use the RCA connection with my Benchmark DAC3 HGC and it works flawlessly. I don't know what's wrong with my setup so go here and looking for help.

Anyone?


----------



## betula

Sray said:


> Hi,
> 
> The thread is a bit too long and I am not sure if anyone pairs Qutest with Benchmarkmedia HPA4??
> Couple weeks ago, I purchased Qutest from online shop (autherised local dealer) and connected it to HPA4 in my main system:
> ...


If the problem still exists with the replacement Qutest then perhaps you've got issues with another equipment in the chain and not the Chord DAC?
Another thought, have you tried to change the voltage output of the Qutest? Perhaps 3V is too much for the HPA4?
Btw you don't need to unplug Qutest every day. It was designed to be on 24/7.


----------



## Ilias9001

Sray said:


> Hi,
> 
> The thread is a bit too long and I am not sure if anyone pairs Qutest with Benchmarkmedia HPA4??
> Couple weeks ago, I purchased Qutest from online shop (autherised local dealer) and connected it to HPA4 in my main system:
> ...


What kind of noise are you referring to? 

I have a similar problem mostly when switching inputs(i use all of them), and when i switch back to usb, or in your case, turn on qutest and usb is selected, i get some kind of digital noise that makes the music impossible to listen to. I contacted chord and they labeled it as normal, and noted "The FPGA can be confused if there remains any signal voltage on the input you have switched from.". The way i make it work is disconnect the usb and plug it back in after a few seconds.

Hope that helps


----------



## Sray

Hi,betula,

Thanks. I switch between different voltage settings. Doesn't help. HPA4 can handle up to 4V according to manual.

Hi ilias,
Thanks for sharing this. I noticed it too when I switch between BNC and USB. But for second unit, the USB is the only input for Qutest, will it still "confuse" the FPGA?
Anyway, I will try it and share my finding by next week (I am on tirp).

William


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

Sray said:


> Hi,
> 
> The thread is a bit too long and I am not sure if anyone pairs Qutest with Benchmarkmedia HPA4??
> Couple weeks ago, I purchased Qutest from online shop (autherised local dealer) and connected it to HPA4 in my main system:
> ...


I happen to run almost the exact same setup. I run Intel NUC -> USB -> Qutest -> RCA cable -> HPA4 -> DT990 PRO/Adam Audio T5V + SB16 Ultra.

I've tried to replicate your issue by restarting my Qutest on various voltage settings as well as restarting the entire system but nothing is giving me the same loud noise that you're getting.

I'm starting to think that the HPA4 might be having some issues, especially if you're still getting the same issue with a replacement Qutest. I'd head over to the HPA4 thread to see if anyone has any suggestions or contact Benchmark.


----------



## nephilim32

Sray said:


> Hi,
> 
> The thread is a bit too long and I am not sure if anyone pairs Qutest with Benchmarkmedia HPA4??
> Couple weeks ago, I purchased Qutest from online shop (autherised local dealer) and connected it to HPA4 in my main system:
> ...



If you have a Hummmmmmmmm noise it could be your mains power AC and that could be a grounding issue that creates the noise .
Try removing the grounding pin from your AC cable that powers your amp .
Might work if that is the noise issue.


----------



## Triode User

nephilim32 said:


> If you have a Hummmmmmmmm noise it could be your mains power AC and that could be a grounding issue that creates the noise .
> Try removing the grounding pin from your AC cable that powers your amp .
> Might work if that is the noise issue.



I really really can’t support any advice to remove the grounding from an amp. If it’s a ground loop issue then there has to be another way to sort it.


----------



## gad1 (Feb 21, 2019)

Rob Watts watts effect:

I have large Salk Audio HT3 speakers that demand big time watts for authoritative defined bass.  A great Qutest feature is adjustable
voltage.  The blue lights 3 volt output setting gives the bass an additional punch that was always my system's missing ingredient.
This 3 volt effect (sounds like more watts) has saved me from the expensive consideration of replacing my speakers or the even more
expensive divorce  that would result if I put big subwoofers in my living/listening room  Thank you Chord and the Rob Watts watts
effect.

Like everything else in audio this is system dependent.


----------



## Sray

Hi Nephilim:

We don't have ground pole in our country ( like Japan). So, all devices are powered without ground pin connected. The hummus and zzzz sound can be heard only when HPA4 volume set to closed to 0dB. But, this doesnt happen on DAC3's RCA output even I raise the volume to +15dB! 

The output impedance is very low on Qutest. The HPA4, when you switch to a RCA input not connected to anything, same situation happen but humm and hizz is much louder. But since Nautrachk doesn't have issue with Qutest. I think it is normal?

William


----------



## nephilim32

Triode User said:


> I really really can’t support any advice to remove the grounding from an amp. If it’s a ground loop issue then there has to be another way to sort it.



Buy an inexpensive power line conditioner. Thats what I did. 
The conditioner has a grounding pin .
I actually had this problem with my Burson Soloist and getting rid of the pin eliminated the hum, then I bought the conditioner for 2 reasons. Get a slightly cleaner mains AC power line and 2) protect my equipment from possible shortages or spikes from power outages. 
Works and worked like a charm for me .


----------



## nephilim32

Sray said:


> Hi Nephilim:
> 
> We don't have ground pole in our country ( like Japan). So, all devices are powered without ground pin connected. The hummus and zzzz sound can be heard only when HPA4 volume set to closed to 0dB. But, this doesnt happen on DAC3's RCA output even I raise the volume to +15dB!
> 
> ...



Hey William. I am sorry to hear about your dilemma. I don't think your situation is normal. 
I mainly thought it could be a grounding interference issue with your amp into your AC main line. 
I think as some have suggested already. Try using one digital output at a time. 
In any case . Keep us posted cause I am curious about your problem .
Also . if you have a cd transport, eliminate the computer based audio in your chain to see if there really is an issue with your setup.


----------



## ayang02

Sray said:


> Hi Nephilim:
> 
> We don't have ground pole in our country ( like Japan). So, all devices are powered without ground pin connected. The hummus and zzzz sound can be heard only when HPA4 volume set to closed to 0dB. But, this doesnt happen on DAC3's RCA output even I raise the volume to +15dB!
> 
> ...



Hey there, I'm also in Taiwan but my house has newer AC outlets with ground pin (3-pole types). I'm not sure if your humming issue is ground loop or not but is it possible to use a RCA to XLR cable for your Qutest to HPA4? If you can use such cable for balanced inputs, this cable will be single-ended. You just have to make sure pins 1 and 3 of the 3-pin XLR inputs are separated properly (some RCA to XLR cables have these 2 pins shorted).

I am currently using RCA to XLR cables for my Qutest to THX AAA 789 amp. I read in the the THX 789 thread that such cable may be able to resolve some humming issues if the cable is wired properly.


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

I have retried to create the buzzing issue once again and have successfully recreated it with max volume (+15db) on the HPA4 through my DT-990 Pro headphones.

If I played any music at that volume I'd instantly blow up my headphones and my ear drums so I'm not too worried. If I played anything at -20db I'd still cook my ears and headphones.

I'm aware my power is quite dirty though with tons of random computer related devices connected so I'm not too surprised there is some noise. Especially when I have the amp at full power.


----------



## Sray

Hi, Ayang:

Maybe we can have a direct talk here in Taiwan.
Would you please post me your phone number by private message?

When the sympotm happened, I connect BNC to my TV coaxial output and switch USB input to it. Again, TV sound covered by noise. I start to believe it is kind of FPGA confusing problem in my setup. Because the noise to me, is kind of digital noise I experienced before when some sample rate or bitrate was set incorrectly. Maybe my setup has some ground noise problem and the noise level is high enough to make FPGA "think" there is something else from other input?

I will try to use a fake ground product first from my friend to see if it will solve my problem.

William


----------



## ayang02

Sray said:


> Hi, Ayang:
> 
> Maybe we can have a direct talk here in Taiwan.
> Would you please post me your phone number by private message?
> ...



Ah, I think then you can ignore my solution, I really don't have much to add so there's no need to chat I suppose.

I think I've heard the exact same issue when cycling between the inputs and I only use USB. When I cycle back to the USB option, the sound is noisy and very distorted. Does this issue continue after you unplug and replug the USB cable? If it does, it's a new issue. If not, I think it's normal.


----------



## Sray

Nautrachkfriend said:


> I have retried to create the buzzing issue once again and have successfully recreated it with max volume (+15db) on the HPA4 through my DT-990 Pro headphones.
> 
> If I played any music at that volume I'd instantly blow up my headphones and my ear drums so I'm not too worried. If I played anything at -20db I'd still cook my ears and headphones.
> 
> I'm aware my power is quite dirty though with tons of random computer related devices connected so I'm not too surprised there is some noise. Especially when I have the amp at full power.



I tried use mobile battery and the hiss and hum is lower.


----------



## Hoobi

Hello all,

I'm new at this forum. I have found biggest topic about qutest
It's hard to read all 211 pages I'm looking for a good USB cable for qutest. Do you have any recommendations?
No more than 200$.

Regards, Hubert


----------



## Arniesb

Hoobi said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I'm new at this forum. I have found biggest topic about qutest
> It's hard to read all 211 pages I'm looking for a good USB cable for qutest. Do you have any recommendations?
> ...


I heard great things about lush usb cable. It cost About 200 i think. Curious is price to performance champ with much better resolution than copper cables and it is So Quiet, only few cables can achieve it, but unfortunately its over 300.


----------



## jwbrent

Arniesb said:


> I heard great things about lush usb cable. It cost About 200 i think. Curious is price to performance champ with much better resolution than copper cables and it is So Quiet, only few cables can achieve it, but unfortunately its over 300.



Depends on the length if I recall correctly.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Hoobi said:


> I'm looking for a good USB cable for qutest. Do you have any recommendations?


I have compared Furutech Formula 2, AudioQuest Cinnamon, Schiit PYST and cheap "printer cable". Sound with printer cable was awful, Schiit and AQ much better, but almost no difference between them (maybe AQ is better, but I`m not sure, really). Furutech sounds definitely better than AQ. Difference between Furutech and AQ is not huge, like it is between AQ and "printer cable", but still noticeable.


----------



## Hoobi

Thanks for a reply. Furutech looks good with his price interesting compare to lush cable... Price 4 times more...


----------



## jwbrent

Hoobi said:


> Thanks for a reply. Furutech looks good with his price interesting compare to lush cable... Price 4 times more...



Furutech makes highly regarded products, and its build quality from my experience is top notch, especially its connectors. That’s why it’s product can be so pricey. I’m of the belief it’s better to buy right the first time instead of having or wanting to upgrade later, a more expensive path, ultimately.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Well, according to "audiophile cables pricing standards" Furutech Formula 2 is a cheap cable  It is well built. It`s power and data lines are shielded not only from outside, but from each other. I think it`s pretty much enough for USB cable.


----------



## OctavianH

Hoobi said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I'm new at this forum. I have found biggest topic about qutest
> It's hard to read all 211 pages I'm looking for a good USB cable for qutest. Do you have any recommendations?
> ...



I use a QED Reference USB and I am very pleased about it.
Link: https://www.qed.co.uk/cables/hdmi-digital/reference-usb-a-b.html


----------



## dac64 (Feb 23, 2019)

Stock USB cable  is good enough on my system because  I glued  the qutest tightly onto a board, an oversized  $800 board.

The board was initially customised for my transport or dac 15 years ago.

Btw, the board is still selling at the price 15 years ago.


----------



## Deftone

OctavianH said:


> I tried in the last days the optical and USB and for me they do not sound in the same way. But first to explain the environment:
> 1) source 1 is a PC with Foobar and ASIO where I play FLAC files, connected to Qutest via a 3m QED Reference USB A-B cable
> 2) source 2 is a CXC (CD transport), connected to Qutest via a 1m QED Reference Quartz optical cable
> Both inputs are connected at the same time, and I switch the input via the button. Qutest is connected via RCA to a tube Amp.
> ...





x RELIC x said:


> It’s not the jitter on the USB for 2 reasons. One, the USB timing is asynchronous, meaning the timing comes from the DAC so there should be zero jitter. Two, Rob’s designs are jitter immune on all inputs due to the Pulse Array design. Likely you are hearing the difference from RF noise being injected in to the analogue components with USB making it sound brighter. As you rightly mentioned the optical is electrically isolated so does not transmit the RF noise so this is the most likely reason why it sounds darker, as Rob has explained many times.



I think it is some type of noise because my high power pc gives sibilance with usb but none when using optical


----------



## MagnusH

USB cables seems to matter for all DACs, but how about optical? Does cables matter for toslink? I think Rob said that toslink was source independent, which should mean cables don't matter. But has anyone tried and experimented?


----------



## betula

Many people say, Qutest is for speakers.
I think Qutest is the best DAC under £2000 for any purpose.

Folks tell me I should swap Qutest for Hugo2 for headphone listening. I don't agree. I think Qutest paired with TOTL headphone amps perform better. Until I can pay for TT2. 

I am very happy with my CMA600i balanced out. I actually prefer this to iFi Pro iCan. 
I am curious however to try Violectric V281 or can't wait for Headamp GSX-mini. Both could be fun until I can afford TT2.


----------



## Hoobi

Stock USB cable is good like stock power supply one like it, one not even without sound impact, just for good feeling. It's important, after all....


----------



## lukeslens

I'm curious about how well the Qutest does with separation considering its unbalanced option only? I've become quite accustomed to how powerfully defined the separation can be when using my Focal Clears in a fully balanced mode. It's made using them balanced almost a requirement for me cause the separation is so intoxicating!

I _was_ going from a Teac UD-501 into a Loxjie P20 and was just blown away by what I was hearing. Then I attempted to upgrade to the CMA600i to regain some of the detail I was losing with the P20, expecting that to be an upgrade (even though it doesn't offer balanced inputs for a separate dac) and am admittedly disappointed in the outcome to be honest. Was looking at a Qutest because I honestly love the musical sound signature of the Chord products but worried that I'm never going to quite get that dynamic separation I had again until I'm in a fully balanced configuration once more (balanced dac > balanced headphone amp). So really wondering if anybody who has experience with both that kind of set-up plus the Qutest can attest to the quality there and if you lose some of that by being restricted to its unbalanced outputs? 

My alternative is to just go with something like an ADI-2 into a tube amp to try to reclaim some of the coloration I prefer with the Clears.


----------



## miketlse

MagnusH said:


> USB cables seems to matter for all DACs, but how about optical? Does cables matter for toslink? I think Rob said that toslink was source independent, which should mean cables don't matter. But has anyone tried and experimented?


Some owners use the terms SPDIF and optical interchangeably, when talking about cables.
The SPDIF standard applies to both optical and coaxial cables.
In this case we are just talking optical.
The FAQ in post #3 of the mojo thread contains some useful generic information about optical cables.
I like quite a few other posters use kabeldirect cables which are quite cheap.
They provide good performance at CD quality file bitrates.
If I found that they could not handle HiRes files, I would consider changing to glass fibre based cables - otherwise, there is no need to pay hundreds of dollars to explore optical as an input for Chord dacs.
YMMV if you prefer to pay more money.


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

lukeslens said:


> I'm curious about how well the Qutest does with separation considering its unbalanced option only? I've become quite accustomed to how powerfully defined the separation can be when using my Focal Clears in a fully balanced mode. It's made using them balanced almost a requirement for me cause the separation is so intoxicating!
> 
> I _was_ going from a Teac UD-501 into a Loxjie P20 and was just blown away by what I was hearing. Then I attempted to upgrade to the CMA600i to regain some of the detail I was losing with the P20, expecting that to be an upgrade (even though it doesn't offer balanced inputs for a separate dac) and am admittedly disappointed in the outcome to be honest. Was looking at a Qutest because I honestly love the musical sound signature of the Chord products but worried that I'm never going to quite get that dynamic separation I had again until I'm in a fully balanced configuration once more (balanced dac > balanced headphone amp). So really wondering if anybody who has experience with both that kind of set-up plus the Qutest can attest to the quality there and if you lose some of that by being restricted to its unbalanced outputs?
> 
> My alternative is to just go with something like an ADI-2 into a tube amp to try to reclaim some of the coloration I prefer with the Clears.


You do not miss out on much with the unbalanced outs on the Qutest. I've run fully balanced setups and honestly I can't tell any sort of difference between the fully balanced setups vs the unbalanced output on the Qutest. The unbalanced output on the Qutest is designed very well so you really aren't missing much vs a traditional fully balanced setup except for maybe some extra volume. Heck I've had a more expensive, highly regarded, fully balanced dac that didn't even sound as good as the unbalanced Qutest if that says anything.

It does sound like you would benefit from using a balanced amp with the Qutest that can convert from unbalanced to balanced.  I currently run my Qutest to my HPA 4 which takes the unbalanced signal and feeds it into a balanced amp infrastructure so that I can plug my headphones into the 4 pin XLR output on the amp. It might not be technically as good as fully balanced setup but honestly I would never be able to tell the difference in a million years.


----------



## lukeslens

Nautrachkfriend said:


> You do not miss out on much with the unbalanced outs on the Qutest. I've run fully balanced setups and honestly I can't tell any sort of difference between the fully balanced setups vs the unbalanced output on the Qutest.


That was exactly what I was hoping to hear. I had a Mojo for awhile and did fall in love with the Chord sound and then had a chance to audition the Qutest recently over at Music Direct and though it was only for a good 10 minutes probably, it was giving me what I knew I'm missing in my set-up right now.


----------



## Joe-Siow

MagnusH said:


> USB cables seems to matter for all DACs, but how about optical? Does cables matter for toslink? I think Rob said that toslink was source independent, which should mean cables don't matter. But has anyone tried and experimented?



I'm using the Tellurium Q Ultra Silver USB cable. The guys from Tellurium Q make some great cables. This one has the all the properties of the Black series with slightly more emphasis on details and clarity. 
As I'm currently using Black Cat Lupo speaker cables with a special order of mini Stargate incoming, I'd love to try Chris' USB Digit USB cable. 

If you looking for optical cables, I'd highly recommend Lifatec glass cables. Always glass over plastic for me.


----------



## Sray

hi everyone,

thanks for helping on the noise issue I reported here.
After some power cycles and cable attach/detach, Qutest can sing without noise. Still, don't know the root cause. I will exam more to figure out the possible root cause. Will share here once I find it.
thanks.

William


----------



## Ragnar-BY (Feb 25, 2019)

lukeslens said:


> I'm curious about how well the Qutest does with separation considering its unbalanced option only? I've become quite accustomed to how powerfully defined the separation can be when using my Focal Clears in a fully balanced mode. It's made using them balanced almost a requirement for me cause the separation is so intoxicating!


There are some amps (like HeadAmp GS-X mk2) that require balanced input for balanced output. And there amps (like Violectric V2xx) which will give you both outputs with either SE or balanced input. With such amp and interconnects shorter than 2m (maybe even longer, I`m not sure), there is no real need for balanced DAC. Also, good SE amp could easily outperform mediocre balanced amp. I choose Qutest over competitors because for me SQ was more important than additional features. If you like the Chord house sound in general, you would not be disappointed with it.


----------



## odessamarin (Feb 25, 2019)

I am just wander for how long the dogma about balanced interconnections usefulleness only for long distance will pops up here and there. This is just not true. What is more important here is no crosstalk between channels in compare to the single ended, where it is always present due to the common ground. Now, if one really want to hear it.. you need to go full balanced.. from the DAC to headphones. And don't listen this crap about how single ended can be as good or even better. It could never be by definition. In case both gears is high level.. Once you hear how the soundstage represents with full balanced gears, you can't go back for single ended. And yes even super duper Qutest will sound flat and lifeless. Belave me or not. Mine sold. I can't comment how it goes with speakers though, have no idea about soundstage importance there.. but if you go with headphones. Do your a favor.. do it right. Go balanced and don't think twice. Try, comes back, and say thanks.


----------



## Arniesb

odessamarin said:


> I am just wander for how long the dogma about balanced interconnections usefulleness only for long distance will pops up here and there. This is just not true. What is more important here is no crosstalk between channels in compare to the single ended, where it is always present due to the common ground. Now, if one really want to hear it.. you need to go full balanced.. from the DAC to headphones. And don't listen this crap about how single ended can be as good or even better. It could never be by definition. In case both gears is high level.. Once you hear how the soundstage represents with full balanced gears, you can't go back for single ended. And yes even super duper Qutest will sound flat and lifeless. Belave me or not. Mine sold. I can't comment how it goes with speakers though, have no idea about soundstage importance there.. but if you go with headphones. Do your a favor.. do it right. Go balanced and don't think twice. Try, comes back, and say thanks.


Do you understand that Its Amp design that can benefit from balanced inputs or not. There is much more Amps that Convert signal to balanced Like Headamp Mini, V281 and many more. For Headamp GSX mk2 it matters cause it convert signal.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

odessamarin said:


> I am just wander for how long the dogma about balanced interconnections usefulleness only for long distance will pops up here and there.


I think it will pop up for a long time. Just because it`s true  Balanced lines solve some problems. Not all setups have those problems.



odessamarin said:


> And don't listen this crap about how single ended can be as good or even better. It could never be by definition. In case both gears is high level..


You can read Hugo TT2 thread and see what Rob says about balanced and SE outputs in Hugo TT2. I assume, nobody would argue that TT2 is a "high level" device.


----------



## odessamarin (Feb 28, 2019)

Arniesb said:


> Do you understand that Its Amp design that can benefit from balanced inputs or not. There is much more Amps that Convert signal to balanced Like Headamp Mini, V281 and many more. For Headamp GSX mk2 it matters cause it convert signal.



I am not talking about convertion amps here. Do I? What I say is once you hear full balance gear as it has to be.. literally two full amps in one, one full amp per channel. And if it appropriate calibrated (bias adjusted), you will never accept single ended scheme compromise. Just this. What ever who say what. You hear it.. done. Technically it superior, channel isolation is superior, scene is as it has to be. Deep, wide, tall. It will be all around you. It's like you discover whole new dimension.
My advice to everybody, don't lose time and money for SE solution. You will regret after you hear balanced. If not, means you never ever will heard what i am talking about, Which would be sad, but fine.


@Ragnar-BY

"The special feature of the combination of a balanced amp with a balanced headphone is the superb channel separation. I want to state that also the channel separation of “normal” headphones and amps is much better than most program material. So there are not many complaints about – maybe because *most users don’t know about the better way…* Sometimes even the high channel separation of normal amps is perceived as not normal and reduced artificially by “cross-feed” circuitries. But the optimized channel separation and low intermodulation are often responsible for the “whow” feeling which many first-time listeners have with balanced headphones. To say it in a striking manner: Hearing with loudspeaker is like sitting in the audience, hearing with headphones is like taking the place of the conductor. Hearing balanced means being part of the orchestra...."

some good reading
http://violectric-usa.com/download/Balanced Headphone Amplifier Explained.pdf


----------



## Joe-Siow

odessamarin said:


> I am not talking about convertion amps here. Do I? What I say is once you hear full balance gear as it has to be.. literally two full amps in one, one full amp per channel. And if it appropriate calibrated (bias adjusted), you will never accept single ended scheme compromise. Just this. What ever who say what. You hear it.. done. Technically it superior, channel isolation is superior, scene is as it has to be. Deep, wide, tall. It will be all around you. It's like you discover whole new dimension.
> My advice to everybody, don't lose time and money for SE solution. You will regret after you hear balanced. If not, means you never ever will heard what i am talking about, Which would be sad, but fine.



I would comment that you are in the wrong thread but then again, it would be on deaf ears.

Moving on then..


----------



## odessamarin (Feb 26, 2019)

.. agree. sorry for offtop.
moving on..


----------



## Hermitsden

Herb Reichert reviewed the Qutest in March 2019 (Vol.42 No.3):
https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-qutest-da-processor-herb-reichert-march-2019


----------



## T Bone (Mar 2, 2019)

I picked up a Chord Qutest 2 days ago - replacing my Holo Spring non-oversampling "R2R" DAC.  While I enjoyed the Holo, the Qutest has far more detail.

I use JRiver Media Center as my player and thought I'd share my configuration.  It might help the next buyer.

I'm using the "kernel streaming" driver.





I have quite a number of DSD files, so enabling bitstreaming was important.




I also created a playlist with a variety of sample rates - from 44.1khz to quad rate DSD - to make test my configuration.


 

It's working great.  Now I've got to get ROON configured!


----------



## T Bone

I use ROON to stream music from headphone system to my 2-channel vinyl rig in the living room.  I'm not a big fan of MQA, but if you use ROON, you use TIDAL, and that means MQA.

I struggled to get the right settings in ROON for my Qutest.  I was only getting the 44.1Khz "red light" when playing some MQA files.  I figured out that I needed to use the "enable MQA Core Decoder" option to get the Qutest to light up with a "Green" 96Khz 

Here's my settings:


----------



## nick77

> I picked up a Chord Qutest 2 days ago - replacing my Holo Spring non-oversampling "R2R" DAC. While I enjoyed the Holo, the Qutest has far more detail.



Hey Tbone welcome to the thread, Im a recovering Holo Spring addict as well!  
I felt the Qutest was a tad more musical and is fitting in nicely here. I am still messing around with settings in Jriver and HQP.


----------



## Triode User

T Bone said:


> I use ROON to stream music from headphone system to my 2-channel vinyl rig in the living room. I'm not a big fan of MQA, but if you use ROON, you use TIDAL, and that means MQA.



I also use Roon and now that also supports Qobuz. I changed from Tidal to Qobuz to get away from MQA.


----------



## Baten

nick77 said:


> Hey Tbone welcome to the thread, Im a recovering Holo Spring addict as well!
> I felt the Qutest was a tad more musical and is fitting in nicely here. I am still messing around with settings in Jriver and HQP.


Damn  I'm really really loving the holo spring 2. Can't even imagine the qutest being much better! I'm a NOS fan though, doesn't the qutest sound much harsher?


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hey guys-do you have any idea why Herb likes Holo more than Qutest?I trust this guy a lot and he has good and honest reputation but both of you say otherwise.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Zzt231gr said:


> Hey guys-do you have any idea why Herb likes Holo more than Qutest?I trust this guy a lot and he has good and honest reputation but both of you say otherwise.



It is always about personal tastes. I imagine the Holo to be softer and more romantic sounding compared to Qutest's more precise nature. No right or wrong choices, just which suits your listening habits more


----------



## Zzt231gr

Joe-Siow said:


> It is always about personal tastes. I imagine the Holo to be softer and more romantic sounding compared to Qutest's more precise nature. No right or wrong choices, just which suits your listening habits more


For personal taste I couldn't agree more!But he mentions that Holo is more natural and transparent!Please read his conclusions.Could it be any connection compatibility?


----------



## Baten

Zzt231gr said:


> For personal taste I couldn't agree more!But he mentions that Holo is more natural and transparent!Please read his conclusions.Could it be any connection compatibility?


Link?


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hermitsden said:


> Herb Reichert reviewed the Qutest in March 2019 (Vol.42 No.3):
> https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-qutest-da-processor-herb-reichert-march-2019


Here you are sir!


----------



## Baten (Mar 3, 2019)

Zzt231gr said:


> Here you are sir!


Interesting! I can understand 'natural', but I find 'transparent' a bad choice of word for the Holo spring (which I own) is surely more colored than the Qutest.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Zzt231gr said:


> For personal taste I couldn't agree more!But he mentions that Holo is more natural and transparent!Please read his conclusions.Could it be any connection compatibility?



I heard the Holo quite sometime back, but it was not on a system that I was familiar with, so my impression might be sketchy.

The Holo is definitely more natural sounding with a more softer/ romantic/ musical presentation. As for transparency, I would think both the Holo and Qutest come very close to one other. We might be splitting hairs here.

A friend owns the Holo, with the Melco N100 as source. I can arrange to drop by his place with my Qutest but it will close to end of March as I will be travelling next week.


----------



## Romi54 (Mar 3, 2019)

@Rob Watts
Can you please explain what you have done with the orange filter m compared to the white? Orange really sounds better ....
Thank you


----------



## Zzt231gr

Joe-Siow said:


> I heard the Holo quite sometime back, but it was not on a system that I was familiar with, so my impression might be sketchy.
> 
> The Holo is definitely more natural sounding with a more softer/ romantic/ musical presentation. As for transparency, I would think both the Holo and Qutest come very close to one other. We might be splitting hairs here.
> 
> A friend owns the Holo, with the Melco N100 as source. I can arrange to drop by his place with my Qutest but it will close to end of March as I will be travelling next week.


That would be great!


----------



## x RELIC x

Romi54 said:


> @rob
> Can you please explain what you have done with the orange filter m compared to the white? Orange really sounds better ....
> Thank you



If you want Rob Watt’s attention this is his handle, @Rob Watts


----------



## nick77

> Damn I'm really really loving the holo spring 2. Can't even imagine the qutest being much better! I'm a NOS fan though, doesn't the qutest sound much harsher?



My comments need to be taken with a grain of salt, the Spring had already left the building and I was just going on audible memory. As someone already mentioned it probably just comes down to personal preference, I just never connected with the Spring.


----------



## T Bone

Baten said:


> Damn  I'm really really loving the holo spring 2. Can't even imagine the qutest being much better! I'm a NOS fan though, doesn't the qutest sound much harsher?



I have the original Holo, not the Holo 2.  From what I understand the core R2R circuit hasn't changed - so essentially they're the same.  
In my limited time with the Qutest I'm finding more detail and a wider soundstage than with the Holo Spring.  I use the Focal Utopia headphone.  They're not known for having the widest soundstage.  I found myself frequently adding a little crossfeed in JRiver Media center to open them up.  It became clear to me that my Holo Spring was the limiting factor in my rig.  Once I swapped in the Qutest that narrow soundstage disappeared.  

That's not to say that the Holo is "bad", it's that the Qutest is doing everything I prefer better.  I'm something of a detail freak and the Qutest gives me what I'm looking for.  ...and no, I don't find it harsh at all.  Even if you did, there's 4x filters - surely one would fit your personal taste.


----------



## Baten

T Bone said:


> I have the original Holo, not the Holo 2.  From what I understand the core R2R circuit hasn't changed - so essentially they're the same.
> In my limited time with the Qutest I'm finding more detail and a wider soundstage than with the Holo Spring.  I use the Focal Utopia headphone.  They're not known for having the widest soundstage.  I found myself frequently adding a little crossfeed in JRiver Media center to open them up.  It became clear to me that my Holo Spring was the limiting factor in my rig.  Once I swapped in the Qutest that narrow soundstage disappeared.
> 
> That's not to say that the Holo is "bad", it's that the Qutest is doing everything I prefer better.  I'm something of a detail freak and the Qutest gives me what I'm looking for.  ...and no, I don't find it harsh at all.  Even if you did, there's 4x filters - surely one would fit your personal taste.


I see! I'm more of a "laid-back" sound freak. But would love to compare both


----------



## odanovich (Mar 3, 2019)

Has anyone used the Chord Qutest paired with an old Sennheiser HDVA 600 amplifier?  I'm considering adding this DAC to my HDVA + HD800 but am curious to know anyone elses thoughts...

I bought the HDVA 600 + HD800 on Ebay for $1,200 total, but am currently without a DAC as I connect my laptop straight into the HDVA using a 3.5mm audio jack to RCA cable.

I'm wondering if the upgrade will be noticeable - or more importantly - if it will be worthy of the additional investment price.

Thanks for any feedback. It helps keep me complacent as I wait for the shipment to arrive. I'll be sure to share my thoughts in the near future


----------



## Deftone

T Bone said:


> I picked up a Chord Qutest 2 days ago - replacing my Holo Spring non-oversampling "R2R" DAC.  While I enjoyed the Holo, the Qutest has far more detail.
> 
> I use JRiver Media Center as my player and thought I'd share my configuration.  It might help the next buyer.
> 
> ...



In Jriver you should use ASIO or WASAPI driver and in advanced settings switch Jriver bit exact dither to no dither.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

odanovich said:


> Has anyone used the Chord Qutest paired with an old Sennheiser HDVA 600 amplifier?  I'm considering adding this DAC to my HDVA + HD800 but am curious to know anyone elses thoughts...
> 
> I bought the HDVA 600 + HD800 on Ebay for $1,200 total, but am currently without a DAC as I connect my laptop straight into the HDVA using a 3.5mm audio jack to RCA cable.
> 
> ...


Well, the improvement leap between laptop headphone out and a DAC like Qutest would be great. Sound differences between a DACs isn`t something that would punch you into your face with impressions. If it is your first experience with external DAC, give it a careful listening for a week or two. Then return to the laptop for comparison and you`ll understand what a DAC is doing.


----------



## Rob Watts

Romi54 said:


> @Rob Watts
> Can you please explain what you have done with the orange filter m compared to the white? Orange really sounds better ....
> Thank you



Sure I can explain, but it's not simple - I will try my best to explain.

The white/green filter has a WTA 16FS to 256FS filter, which replaces the analogue type digital filter (it's a third order IIR type filter) that is used with orange/red.

To perfectly reconstruct the analogue signal that was in the ADC before it was sampled you need a sinc function filter. But a sinc function filter has values that take an infinite amount of time to decay to zero; fortunately the values of the sinc function halves every time you double the time period (that is double the number of samples that the filter processes by doubling the tap length); that means for a given oversampling rate (16FS say) if you double the tap length, then the values of the sinc function halves. Eventually we get to the point where the values are so small it will no longer make any difference to SQ. Hence with the M scaler, I have sinc function values that are smaller than 16 bits, which means that we can guarantee reconstruction at 16FS to better than 16 bits, as it is accurate to sinc to better than 16 bits, and it's this aspect that gives the M scaler it's transformational sound quality improvement. 

But there is another aspect about a sinc function; it is infinitely oversampled, so you need finer and finer time resolution. In this case, as you double the oversampling rate using a sinc function filter, you reduce the area of the error by four; so a 16FS filter will reduce the area of the peak transient error by 256 times. With 16FS we have an output every 1.6 uS; and with 256FS the output is every 88 nS. Now when I designed the WTA 2 filter, which takes us from 16FS to 256FS I did not expect any real change in SQ, as the ear/brain resolves 4uS of timing differences. But when I heard the filter, I was surprised at how much a difference it made to the perception of starting and stopping of notes; you can perceive transients much more easily - so I thought it would be cool for people to hear the effect of the filter, which is why I put the option in.

But getting back to your question - technically the white filter (256FS WTA filter engaged) is better able at reconstructing transients more accurately, as running at 256FS means the residual peak error is reduced by another 256 times to 65,536 times; when we increase the accuracy of transients, then it becomes easier to perceive transients; when it's easy for the brain to perceive transients things sound faster, brighter and sharper. So if you are preferring the sound of orange over white than it means that you are doing the equivalent of soft focus for images; this suggests that your system is fundamentally too bright and edgy - either your transducers or the amp driving it is too bright. You may get better results by sticking with white but to use DSP EQ from the source.... but the downside to using source DSP will be a loss in transparency, as it's no longer bit perfect data, and EQ at 44.1 kHz will require re-dithering back to 24 bits, and that degrades transparency. But in the long term ideally you need to get the bright component that's in your system replaced. If you are using loudspeakers, consider repositioning them, so you optimise your system around white or green filters.


----------



## 486930

I have a Zen Mini MKIII on loan from my dealer. I use it as a Roon Core. When I use it's analog output it works, but when I connect it to my Qutest via USB there is no sound. Anyone know what's going on?

On a sidenote, the DAC in the Zen Mini is actually not bad. It's not on par with the Qutest of course, but as a DAC-streamer in a minimal setup with a pair of active monitors it would be really nice....


----------



## x RELIC x

Malmbak said:


> I have a Zen Mini MKIII on loan from my dealer. I use it as a Roon Core. When I use it's analog output it works, but when I connect it to my Qutest via USB there is no sound. Anyone know what's going on?
> 
> On a sidenote, the DAC in the Zen Mini is actually not bad. It's not on par with the Qutest of course, but as a DAC-streamer in a minimal setup with a pair of active monitors it would be really nice....



Um, silly question... did you select USB as the input for the Qutest?


----------



## 486930

x RELIC x said:


> Um, silly question... did you select USB as the input for the Qutest?



Yes. Thank you though. I discovered that I had made some errors in Roon. Now everything is playing very nicely.


----------



## x RELIC x

Malmbak said:


> Yes. Thank you though. I discovered that I had made some errors in Roon. Now everything is playing very nicely.



I usually find it’s the simple things we overlook. Glad you got it working!


----------



## T Bone

Deftone said:


> in advanced settings switch Jriver bit exact dither to no dither.



I am not familiar with the dither setting.  What does it do?  ....and more importantly how does this interact with the DAC?


----------



## T Bone

Has anyone experienced difficulty getting an upstream USB filter to work with the Qutest?
I plugged my Uptone ISO Regen into the signal path and the Qutest disappeared from Windoze.


----------



## nick77

> Has anyone experienced difficulty getting an upstream USB filter to work with the Qutest?
> I plugged my Uptone ISO Regen into the signal path and the Qutest disappeared from Windoze.



I had to reboot the IsoRegen several times before my system connected to it.


----------



## Baten

nick77 said:


> I had to reboot the IsoRegen several times before my system connected to it.


Sounds like fun....


----------



## DMax99

Will be picking up my brand new Qutest tomorrow! YAY! Can't wait!


----------



## Deftone

DMax99 said:


> Will be picking up my brand new Qutest tomorrow! YAY! Can't wait!



*When you sit back in your chair tomorrow and press play...*


----------



## DMax99 (Mar 7, 2019)

Picked up my brand new unit this morning and listening to it now. The sound is so amazing!

Only about 30 mins in now and haven't even play around with the different filters (so still with the incisive neutral filter) and I must say that I am really in love with the sound!!!

Thanks for designing such a great dac @Rob Watts! ! Keep them coming!! I'm definitely a Chord fan NOW (was not impressed with an earlier dac before) ! LOL

Ps. How can I set the sample rate to 768kHz with usb? Atm, the highest I can choose is 384kHz. Thanks!


----------



## Arniesb

DMax99 said:


> Picked up my brand new unit this morning and listening to it now. The sound is so amazing!
> 
> Only about 30 mins in now and haven't even play around with the different filters (so still with the incisive neutral filter) and I must say that I am really in love with the sound!!!
> 
> Thanks for designing such a great dac @Rob Watts! ! Keep them coming!! I'm definitely a Chord fan NOW (was not impressed with an earlier dac before) ! LOL


Nice to hear, what dac you had before?


----------



## Gibson59

Anyone come from using any of the Schiit DACs to a Qutest? 

I’ve got a Schiit Bifrost Multibit and I’m thinking of selling and getting a Qutest. I had a nice audition with a Qutest at a HiFi store, but it’s different than actually owning and living with one for a while in your home.


----------



## Deftone

DMax99 said:


> Picked up my brand new unit this morning and listening to it now. The sound is so amazing!
> 
> Only about 30 mins in now and haven't even play around with the different filters (so still with the incisive neutral filter) and I must say that I am really in love with the sound!!!
> 
> ...



Dont upsample before the dac let Qutest do all the work.

Use Chord ASIO driver and send bitperfect from your player.


----------



## Baten

Definitely let the qutest upsample for sure, use 44/48Khz. If you don't, why get the qutest with its insane filtering in the first place


----------



## DMax99

So just choose the 44/48Khz option on the computer??


----------



## DMax99

Arniesb said:


> Nice to hear, what dac you had before?



I've had quite a few before lol... 

Now it's just down to: 3x Audio-GD, 1x Lampizator, 1x Parasound, 1x Resonessence.


----------



## OctavianH

I reported some weeks back that the ISO Regen was not improving my Qutest. Well, it seems that everything depends also on the cables. I changed the RCA interconnects to Chord Clearway and tried again the ISO Regen. Now it seems, even if I power it with a normal power supply, that it adds some improvement. But the overall sound presentation is much darker. Maybe because the RF noise adds brightness? Anyway, I will continue to try it several hours. Has anyone tried it with the Ultracap LPS and can say if there is such a major improvement over a normal switching power supply?


----------



## Arniesb

OctavianH said:


> I reported some weeks back that the ISO Regen was not improving my Qutest. Well, it seems that everything depends also on the cables. I changed the RCA interconnects to Chord Clearway and tried again the ISO Regen. Now it seems, even if I power it with a normal power supply, that it adds some improvement. But the overall sound presentation is much darker. Maybe because the RF noise adds brightness? Anyway, I will continue to try it several hours. Has anyone tried it with the Ultracap LPS and can say if there is such a major improvement over a normal switching power supply?


Generally these things shouldn't change sound to warm... It should sound smoother though. Also these decrapifiers highlight cables sound so much. Do you runing copper cable from regen to Qutest?


----------



## Triode User

DMax99 said:


> So just choose the 44/48Khz option on the computer??



Best is to find a way of the computer outputting the file at exactly the same resolution as the music file or streamed file in the case of Qobuz or similar. for instance I have a variety of 44.1, 48, 96 and 192kHz files on my server.


----------



## OctavianH

The change of the sound to a darker one happened when I changed the RCA interconnects from Chord C-Line to Chord Clearway. In the past, when I bought the ISO Regen, I had the feeling that is was damaging somehow the sound. Today I tried it again, the only difference being the Clearway, and the sound seems fuller and the bass more precise.
From the ISO Regen to Qutest I use the included USPCB adapter which can be found here:
https://uptoneaudio.com/products/uspcb-a-b-adapter
You can see it also in the picture. It is the 90 degree turned version.


----------



## Deftone

DMax99 said:


> So just choose the 44/48Khz option on the computer??



It would be better to just use the chord driver with your music player then sample rates will change automatically, for everything else on windows set the playback rate to 24/44.1


----------



## greenmac

Picked up my Qutest today from Richer Sounds and planning to add Innuos Zen mini

What modestly priced speakers are people using ?

Looking for small footprint but big soundstage and bass


----------



## Deftone

greenmac said:


> Picked up my Qutest today from Richer Sounds and planning to add Innuos Zen mini
> 
> *What modestly priced speakers are people using ?*
> 
> Looking for small footprint but big soundstage and bass



This is a headphone forum, we dont use the S word around here.


----------



## DMax99

greenmac said:


> Picked up my Qutest today from Richer Sounds and planning to add Innuos Zen mini
> 
> What modestly priced speakers are people using ?
> 
> Looking for small footprint but big soundstage and bass



Active or passive speakers?


----------



## Jon L (Mar 7, 2019)

0307191631 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Did some USB cable comparisons on Qutest.  No need to go into gory details since I can easily see some people preferring one over the other depending on their system configuration and personal tastes.  I will confirm the Oyaide d+ usb class A is a great bargain at the price, way better than something like the Belkin or other generic stuff.  Great extension on top and bottom and does not sound cheap.  There is some emphasis in the frequency range of high hats but not grossly so, just noticeable in direct A-B comparisons.  I personally prefer more vivid midrange presentation of something like the JCAT USB cable (not in the photo above), which some people will surely find too vivid.
I also can see why so many people love the Curious, which gives a very velvety, sophisticated intensity centered around midrange, but it could use more upper and lower range sparkle and dynamics.
Acoustic BBQ USB cable (mine is a unique version with power leg being silver) and Wireworld Platinum 7 sound uniquely themselves, and those who have heard them click with their systems will surely claim them god-sent.  WW is quite pricey but BBQ isn't.

Each USB cable changing the sound so much tends to be annoying, and I ended up finding the sound signature I prefer by using the DXIO Pro3A usb-spdif converter, directly connected to Qutest with RCA-BNC adapter, skipping the need for a spdif cable, which is a HUGE boost to sound quality.  I personally find different spdif cables to sound at least as different as USB cables.  JCAT usb cable connects DXIO to SotM soundcard (CAPS v3 server w SSD and linear PS).  This combo is giving me the most "live" sound with raw dynamics and vivid presence I prefer.




0307191626 by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------



## HumanMedia

Thanks for sharing these findings John L.
I have heard this a few times now, that people get better results from coaxial SPDIF, and of course optical SPDIF, over USB connections.

Yes I’m sure with lots of effort and the right decrapifiers and cables and ferrites that this may be evened up somewhat. But even the cleanest USB signal still has to get decoded at the receiving end by transceivers that kick out nasty 8khz artefacts. And without jumping through lots of hoops maybe the default untreated noise of the coax SPDIF connection ‘system’ is generally less than the default untreated noise of a USB connection system?

It makes me want to pull out my old audiophilleo and try it myself, although my growing collection of higher bitrate material still mandates a USB connection. Or the ultimate decrapifier - a high price tag, dual BNC Hugo MScaler...


----------



## Arniesb

HumanMedia said:


> Thanks for sharing these findings John L.
> I have heard this a few times now, that people get better results from coaxial SPDIF, and of course optical SPDIF, over USB connections.
> 
> Yes I’m sure with lots of effort and the right decrapifiers and cables and ferrites that this may be evened up somewhat. But even the cleanest USB signal still has to get decoded at the receiving end by transceivers that kick out nasty 8khz artefacts. And without jumping through lots of hoops maybe the default untreated noise of the coax SPDIF connection ‘system’ is generally less than the default untreated noise of a USB connection system?
> ...


Decrapifiers is a rabbit hole. Once you hear a differences between good cable in combination with decrapifier its impossible to go back. Also blu ray movies, gaming benefit from decrapifiers a lot too.


----------



## OctavianH

I would say that the dual BNC inputs are not present on the Qutest just for compatibility with old devices. I would say we should be patient that good times are coming. Or at least I hope so.


----------



## HumanMedia

Primarily they are for the Hugo M Scaler. And let's hope for a cheaper version from Chord and maybe 704/768 kHz input from other devices?



OctavianH said:


> I would say that the dual BNC inputs are not present on the Qutest just for compatibility with old devices. I would say we should be patient that good times are coming. Or at least I hope so.


----------



## jwbrent (Mar 8, 2019)

OctavianH said:


> I would say that the dual BNC inputs are not present on the Qutest just for compatibility with old devices. I would say we should be patient that good times are coming. Or at least I hope so.



Rob Watts has commented on this thread that he’s not optimistic about a lower priced scaler for the Qutest. Whatever chip(s) is needed for FPGA is too expensive, and he doesn’t see any signs of it going lower anytime soon.

With that said, a simplified scaler matched in size that a Qutest can stack upon would be a great thing. Around 2.5-3K, I hope.


----------



## OctavianH

jwbrent said:


> With that said, a simplified scaler matched in size that a Qutest can stack upon would be a great thing. Around 2.5-3K, I hope.



When the M-Scaler is double the price of the DAC I would say "Houston, we have a problem". I do not afford it, and if I would to I will change the Qutest.


----------



## jwbrent

OctavianH said:


> When the M-Scaler is double the price of the DAC I would say "Houston, we have a problem". I do not afford it, and if I would to I will change the Qutest.



The Qutest is $1,900, so hardly double. The M Scaler retails for more than the Hugo TT2. Regardless, just because a device is released that improves the Qutest doesn’t take away from your existing enjoyment.


----------



## domho7

I have been toying with a few dac trying to find 1 that's better and cheaper  But guess I will end up getting the qutest as a dac.


----------



## OctavianH

domho7 said:


> I have been toying with a few dac trying to find 1 that's better and cheaper  But guess I will end up getting the qutest as a dac.



Qutest is a terrific DAC and I love it. It was one of my best acquisitions in the last 2 years, but if I would like to try another DAC when making a choice, that one will be RME ADI-2 DAC. I have never heard it, but I read about it. It is only marginally cheaper but I am not sure if it will be better. Qutest is really a masterpiece.


----------



## domho7

OctavianH said:


> Qutest is a terrific DAC and I love it. It was one of my best acquisitions in the last 2 years, but if I would like to try another DAC when making a choice, that one will be RME ADI-2 DAC. I have never heard it, but I read about it. It is only marginally cheaper but I am not sure if it will be better. Qutest is really a masterpiece.


Yes I was also eyeing the RME but I am worried about the handshake compatibility as there's no xmos interface. But with fgpa & xmos it works v smooth & fine


----------



## Tobes

Baten said:


> Definitely let the qutest upsample for sure, use 44/48Khz. If you don't, why get the qutest with its insane filtering in the first place


Chord seem to think prior upsampling is beneficial, at least with their M-scaler, I would definitely experiment - particularly if you had something like Hqplayer.


----------



## x RELIC x

Tobes said:


> Chord seem to think prior upsampling is beneficial, at least with their M-scaler, I would definitely experiment - particularly if you had something like Hqplayer.



Correction: Rob feels _his_ upsampling is superior, not just upsampling on its own. Chord DACs already upsample to a large amount with the WTA filters so the general recommendation is to feed them bit perfect data and let the WTA filter do the upsampling. The M scaler is the same WTA filter on steroids, and definitely not all upsamplers are equal.


----------



## ayang02

Anyone have any tips or suggestions for Mac users in terms of driver/configuration? I just use the built-in MIDI tool to select the Qutest sampling rate, that's it.

Thanks!


----------



## Baten

ayang02 said:


> Anyone have any tips or suggestions for Mac users in terms of driver/configuration? I just use the built-in MIDI tool to select the Qutest sampling rate, that's it.
> 
> Thanks!


Just use it via default midi tool settings  don't sweat it


----------



## Scrum92

ayang02 said:


> Anyone have any tips or suggestions for Mac users in terms of driver/configuration? I just use the built-in MIDI tool to select the Qutest sampling rate, that's it.
> 
> Thanks!



IMO use Exclusive Mode where possible anyway.


----------



## ayang02

Scrum92 said:


> IMO use Exclusive Mode where possible anyway.



Thanks, are you referring to Roon usage or is this mode accessible somewhere within the Mac OS?


----------



## Triode User

ayang02 said:


> Anyone have any tips or suggestions for Mac users in terms of driver/configuration? I just use the built-in MIDI tool to select the Qutest sampling rate, that's it.
> 
> Thanks!



I’m not sure you can do it with midi. It resamples to the selected output frequency which may or may not be the native sample rate of the file. 

I will be interested to see what others use for a Mac.


----------



## Scrum92

ayang02 said:


> Thanks, are you referring to Roon usage or is this mode accessible somewhere within the Mac OS?



Yeah, Roon will have that option. It's not a Mac OS option. What it means is that the software has exclusive control of the DAC and bypasses the internal OS mixer, meaning bit-perfect playback. It will bypass your OS format setting and playback in the source format, so if you are playing a 192kHz file the Mojo will play in 192kHz irrespective of your OS setting. 

The inconvenience is that you cannot use your DAC for playback of anything else whilst music is playing, only Roon. So if you load YouTube and try to play a video, there will not be any audio.


----------



## Tobes

x RELIC x said:


> The M scaler is the same WTA filter on steroids, and definitely not all upsamplers are equal.


Indeed.
I've found generic upsamplers to be of dubious benefit with well designed dacs.
All I'm saying is that there is no harm in experimenting, especially if one already owns a sophisticated upsampler/filter software like Hqplayer.


----------



## x RELIC x

Tobes said:


> no harm in experimenting



Yeah, we can agree there for sure!


----------



## ayang02

Triode User said:


> I’m not sure you can do it with midi. It resamples to the selected output frequency which may or may not be the native sample rate of the file.
> 
> I will be interested to see what others use for a Mac.



I don't see a way to auto-adjust the sample rate in Mac. I guess I'll have to select something that works in Midi and live with it for the moment.



Scrum92 said:


> Yeah, Roon will have that option. It's not a Mac OS option. What it means is that the software has exclusive control of the DAC and bypasses the internal OS mixer, meaning bit-perfect playback. It will bypass your OS format setting and playback in the source format, so if you are playing a 192kHz file the Mojo will play in 192kHz irrespective of your OS setting.
> 
> The inconvenience is that you cannot use your DAC for playback of anything else whilst music is playing, only Roon. So if you load YouTube and try to play a video, there will not be any audio.



Thanks again, I'm thinking about setting up Roon sometime within a year. This will probably come in handy.


----------



## greenmac

DMax99 said:


> Active or passive speakers?


Passive


----------



## betula

Qutest lifts your headphones to another level. Regardless what you use.


----------



## domho7

betula said:


> Qutest lifts your headphones to another level. Regardless what you use.


Looks good


----------



## jwbrent

ayang02 said:


> I don't see a way to auto-adjust the sample rate in Mac. I guess I'll have to select something that works in Midi and live with it for the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks again, I'm thinking about setting up Roon sometime within a year. This will probably come in handy.



I use Audirvana+ as my playback software. Not only does it have exclusive mode, but the software has other options to minimize any noise from your Mac getting into the data stream. Very reasonably priced (about $70).


----------



## Scrum92

jwbrent said:


> I use Audirvana+ as my playback software. Not only does it have exclusive mode, but the software has other options to minimize any noise from your Mac getting into the data stream. Very reasonably priced (about $70).



Me too. Windows 10 is now also supported, however, much to my annoyance, they are separate licenses. Worth the money nevertheless.


----------



## jwbrent

Scrum92 said:


> Me too. Windows 10 is now also supported, however, much to my annoyance, they are separate licenses. Worth the money nevertheless.



I always thought Audirvana was Mac exclusive, good to know there is a Windows version. I don’t know if it is possible, but I wonder if they will release an iOS version to use with an iPad Pro.

The idea of using an iPad as my bridge is appealing. I have looked at stand alone components like the Lumin and other such devices, but I question whether they are worth the high price when they act as a transport only. I know a transport can make a big difference back from by CD days, but a CD transport is a mechanical device, a streamer isn’t. It’s just a pass thru to the DAC. Anyway, my system sounds great using my MacBook Air, and it’s convenient as well, but there’s always this nagging doubt that I’m missing out on better performance.


----------



## HumanMedia (Mar 10, 2019)

jwbrent said:


> I always thought Audirvana was Mac exclusive, good to know there is a Windows version. I don’t know if it is possible, but I wonder if they will release an iOS version to use with an iPad Pro.
> 
> The idea of using an iPad as my bridge is appealing. I have looked at stand alone components like the Lumin and other such devices, but I question whether they are worth the high price when they act as a transport only. I know a transport can make a big difference back from by CD days, but a CD transport is a mechanical device, a streamer isn’t. It’s just a pass thru to the DAC. Anyway, my system sounds great using my MacBook Air, and it’s convenient as well, but there’s always this nagging doubt that I’m missing out on better performance.



If you are using the default ‘resample all output to a single sampling rate’ then you are definitely missing out on better performance. This may be convenient for low quality destination devices, but it adds a step of really low quality sampling rate conversion before it hits the Qutest which then goes and applies another couple of resampling stages, but by then the damage is done.

Use a proper audio playback app that avoids the low quality rendering and handling of the data, like the above mentioned Audirvana. You should not be allowing low quality resampling at the source and instead having all data going to the DAC at its native sampling rate, then let the DAC do a proper resample. Even then the RFI hotbed of a laptop will add noise either way, so consider some sort of USB decrappifier as well.


----------



## jwbrent

HumanMedia said:


> If you are using the default ‘resample all output to a single sampling rate’ then you are definitely missing out on better performance. This may be convenient for low quality destination devices, but it adds a step of really low quality sampling rate conversion before it hits the Qutest which then goes and applies another couple of resampling stages, but by then the damage is done.
> 
> Use a proper audio playback app that avoids the low quality rendering and handling of the data, like the above mentioned Audirvana. You should not be allowing low quality resampling at the source and instead having all data going to the DAC at its native sampling rate, then let the DAC do a proper resample. Even then the RFI hotbed of a laptop will add noise either way, so consider some sort of USB decrappifier as well.



I do use Audirvana+. Regarding RFI, isn’t the galvanized USB input on the Qutest meant to clean up any noise from the laptop?


----------



## Ross

I have just bought a Qutest to use as a stopgap, having just sold my DAVE/Blu 2, and while I look for my next DAC. I really liked the DAVE/Blu 2, but it wasn't quite perfect for my tastes, so I am looking for something a bit different. Nevertheless, once I sold it, I immediately missed the Chord sound - there is something quite addictive about it - and decided to buy the Qutest just to see how close it came to the DAVE.

Surprisingly, the Qutest does retain a lot of the character of the DAVE. No, it does not have the depth, transparency or detail of the DAVE (and you wouldn't expect it to), but it does have a strong family resemblance, particularly in the sense of naturalness and lack of listening fatigue. I wouldn't be surprised if I ended up buying an M Scaler just to see just how close it can get to the more expensive Chord DACs.

However, the real reason for my post has to do with input selection. I was using the USB input on the Qutest from my Ultrarendu, just as I had done with the DAVE/Blu 2. I noted that the sound was just a touch dry and lacking the last degree of tonal saturation. This wasn't entirely unexpected, since Chord DACs do tend towards the drier end of the spectrum in my experience. This was one of the reasons why I sold the DAVE and Blu 2 (and also why I had sold its predecessor, the QBD76HD). 

However, today I tried switching to the SPDIF input, running my Ultrarendu through a Singxer XU-1, with a Black Cat Silverstar BNC cable. I wasn't expecting to hear a difference, but the sound was vastly improved. Suddenly it was more focussed, tonally richer and more saturated, with a quieter background. This was a big surprise since I had always understood the USB input to be preferred. I wonder if this is unique to the Singxer SU-1 or if the coax input is in fact better generally.


----------



## Jon L

Ross said:


> However, today I tried switching to the SPDIF input, running my Ultrarendu through a Singxer XU-1, with a Black Cat Silverstar BNC cable. I wasn't expecting to hear a difference, but the sound was vastly improved. Suddenly it was more focussed, tonally richer and more saturated, with a quieter background. This was a big surprise since I had always understood the USB input to be preferred. I wonder if this is unique to the Singxer SU-1 or if the coax input is in fact better generally.



I posted on last page how DXIO usb-spdif converter bested Qutest usb input, so it's not just Singxer.  I suggest trying BNC-BNC adapter between Singxer and Qutest to skip the coax cable altogether...




0307191626 by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------



## Deftone

Ross said:


> I have just bought a Qutest to use as a stopgap, having just sold my DAVE/Blu 2, and while I look for my next DAC. I really liked the DAVE/Blu 2, but it wasn't quite perfect for my tastes, so I am looking for something a bit different. Nevertheless, once I sold it, I immediately missed the Chord sound - there is something quite addictive about it - and decided to buy the Qutest just to see how close it came to the DAVE.
> 
> Surprisingly, the Qutest does retain a lot of the character of the DAVE. No, it does not have the depth, transparency or detail of the DAVE (and you wouldn't expect it to), but it does have a strong family resemblance, particularly in the sense of naturalness and lack of listening fatigue. I wouldn't be surprised if I ended up buying an M Scaler just to see just how close it can get to the more expensive Chord DACs.
> 
> ...



Did you try optical with Dave? I couldn’t go back to using anything other than spdif now.


----------



## Ross

Deftone said:


> Did you try optical with Dave? I couldn’t go back to using anything other than spdif now.


No, it never occurred to me to try optical, mostly because I have not had good experiences with optical in the past.


----------



## x RELIC x (Mar 11, 2019)

Ross said:


> No, it never occurred to me to try optical, mostly because I have not had good experiences with optical in the past.



Given that Rob's designs are immune to jitter (as he's measurably shown) then optical is the reference standard since it does not transmit electrical RF noise in to the analogue components of the DAC, which hardens and brightens the sound unnaturally which can get fatiguing quickly.

Seems like the differences you describe when you changed from USB to coaxial. I reckon optical may give a bit more.



Rob Watts said:


> Yes optical is the best input - its really a question of getting the other inputs to match optical.


----------



## Ross

I'll have to dig out a glass optical cable I have lying around somewhere and try it on the Qutest. In theory optical should be the best input for any DAC for exactly the same reason, but when I last tried it (which was many years ago!) optical sounded a bit too, um, _glassy_, and I preferred coax. But I will give it another try.


----------



## Arniesb

Ross said:


> I'll have to dig out a glass optical cable I have lying around somewhere and try it on the Qutest. In theory optical should be the best input for any DAC for exactly the same reason, but when I last tried it (which was many years ago!) optical sounded a bit too, um, _glassy_, and I preferred coax. But I will give it another try.


Maybe try it different cable?


----------



## Ross

Turns out the Singxer has no optical output, so that solves that problem.


----------



## Ross

But not so fast! I tried a Matrix X-SPDIF 2 which I took from another system which does have optical output, and tried it with a cheapie optical cable. Yes, optical sounds better with the Qutest than coax from either the Matrix or the Singxer, and quite noticeably so. 

Any current recommendations for optical cables?


----------



## Baten

Ross said:


> But not so fast! I tried a Matrix X-SPDIF 2 which I took from another system which does have optical output, and tried it with a cheapie optical cable. Yes, optical sounds better with the Qutest than coax from either the Matrix or the Singxer, and quite noticeably so.
> 
> Any current recommendations for optical cables?


lifatec toslink glass


----------



## Ross

Baten said:


> lifatec toslink glass


Thanks!


----------



## HumanMedia (Mar 11, 2019)

jwbrent said:


> I do use Audirvana+. Regarding RFI, isn’t the galvanized USB input on the Qutest meant to clean up any noise from the laptop?



Apologies, the response was mainly for the original poster ayang02 and the other poster using the default midi tools in macOS.
And the ‘isolation’ in galvanic isolation is not isolation from noise but isolation of electrical current via a magnetic field in a transformer. if you are lucky it will give you maybe 40 or 50db noise attentuation across a certain frequency range. Low level noise in the signal will get transferred just like the signal is transferred, some high frequency noise is attenuated and other high frequency noise capacitatively couples across the windings. The better USB decrapifiers will do a lot better than this. There are many many fantastical assumptions about galvanic isolation on forums such as this and I think the misinterpretation of the word isolation Is where it comes from.


----------



## Arniesb

HumanMedia said:


> Apologies, the response was mainly for the original poster ayang02 and the other poster using the default midi tools in macOS.
> And the ‘isolation’ in galvanic isolation is not isolation from noise but isolation of electrical current via a magnetic field in a transformer. if you are lucky it will give you maybe 40 or 50db noise attentuation across a certain frequency range. Low level noise in the signal will get transferred just like the signal is transferred, some high frequency noise is attenuated and other high frequency noise capacitatively couples across the windings. The better USB decrapifiers will do a lot better than this. There are many many fantastical assumptions about galvanic isolation on forums such as this and I think the misinterpretation of the word isolation Is where it comes from.


Absolutely agree. Tried 2qute which have same galvanic isolation as Qutest with simple usb cable then with Wireworld Starlight 7 usb then Wireworld + Ifi nano usb 3.0 
2qute with simple usb cable is no comparison to Ifi nano usb 3.0 + Wireworld Starlight 7... With just simple cable it sound much less 3rd, much more fatiguing, less lively, less extension in bass and highs. I would imagine Just how much more it can improve with Sotm Usb Ultra...
Anyone who think that any chord dac is immune to usb problems is delusional... Better use Optical if you want to save money.


----------



## betula

Arniesb said:


> Absolutely agree. Tried 2qute which have same galvanic isolation as Qutest with simple usb cable then with Wireworld Starlight 7 usb then Wireworld + Ifi nano usb 3.0
> 2qute with simple usb cable is no comparison to Ifi nano usb 3.0 + Wireworld Starlight 7... With just simple cable it sound much less 3rd, much more fatiguing, less lively, less extension in bass and highs. I would imagine Just how much more it can improve with Sotm Usb Ultra...
> Anyone who think that any chord dac is immune to usb problems is delusional... Better use Optical if you want to save money.


That's true for the 2Qute. Much less for the Qutest for whatever reason. I found the iFi iPurifier 3 improved clarity a lot on the 2Qute. Did nothing to Qutest. 
It also depends on the noise level of your system I guess.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> That's true for the 2Qute. Much less for the Qutest for whatever reason. I found the iFi iPurifier 3 improved clarity a lot on the 2Qute. Did nothing to Qutest.
> It also depends on the noise level of your system I guess.


Very interesting. My dealer even said that Dave benefits greatly from these decrapifiers. I heard Dave, but it was with Optical input though.


----------



## OctavianH (Mar 11, 2019)

I think the effects are also depending on a lot of other factors. For example, I tried the 1st gen of iPurifier on Qutest and had to remove it quicly since it sounded much worse that without it. Then I had the chance to try an ISO Regen and the same situation. The after some time I changed the interconnect cables (so output to the amp, not input) to some better ones (with much better isolation) and only by curiosity I mounted again the ISO Regen and now the improvements are there, and the sound from USB is much closer to the one I have on the optical input which is connected to a CD transport. Which I would say can be considered a reference. But there is another problem I'm facing, since Qutest is always powered on, from time to time (for example if I shut down the PC during the night and restart it in the next morning) the Qutest is not seen in the USB connections. It seems the ISO Regen hangs and I have to reboot it to fix this problem. More than this, the ISO Regen becomes quite hot during playback, and it is not getting completely "colder" in idle, so I guess it has some idle power consumption.


----------



## Baten

Arniesb said:


> Very interesting. My dealer even said that Dave benefits greatly from these decrapifiers.



Of course, it makes sense for him to tell you that..


----------



## Arniesb

Baten said:


> Of course, it makes sense for him to tell you that..


Why? You can just compare inside of the any chord dac vs complex usb decrapifier and easily see the difference. Good solutions cost a lot and takes more space which result in more expenses for casework. Nothing is perfect.


----------



## Baten (Mar 11, 2019)

Arniesb said:


> Why? You can just compare inside of the any chord dac vs complex usb decrapifier and easily see the difference. Good solutions cost a lot and takes more space which result in more expenses for casework. Nothing is perfect.


But good solutions for what? What needs a 'solution'? As mentioned above the 2Qute vs Qutest, the latter already has very good power filtering, jitter rejection, ...
There is next to point getting an additional decrapifier. There is no crap. None. Like @betula says the iPurifier3 for example does nothing with it. Why spend $300 or more on nothing??
And if you are really OCD about 'nasty' power, just simple toslink provides absolute galvanic isolation.

I just don't understand why people would attach crazy audiophile gizmo stuff on something that is already properly engineered. At ~$1800, I'd expect it to..


----------



## Macaron

Hi, 

Had great improvement on Qutest with an Allo Usbridge, same improvement using the Usbridge on the M Scaler compared to my fanless PC (hdplex, ssd....).

I had the iPurifier 2 on the Qutest before trying the Usbridge, the Usbridge is far more better for a little more money. 

Galvanic isolation helps but didn't solve all the issues with USB connection and noise. Try it yourself, you'll be surprised.


----------



## jwbrent

HumanMedia said:


> Apologies, the response was mainly for the original poster ayang02 and the other poster using the default midi tools in macOS.
> And the ‘isolation’ in galvanic isolation is not isolation from noise but isolation of electrical current via a magnetic field in a transformer. if you are lucky it will give you maybe 40 or 50db noise attentuation across a certain frequency range. Low level noise in the signal will get transferred just like the signal is transferred, some high frequency noise is attenuated and other high frequency noise capacitatively couples across the windings. The better USB decrapifiers will do a lot better than this. There are many many fantastical assumptions about galvanic isolation on forums such as this and I think the misinterpretation of the word isolation Is where it comes from.



Thank you for clarifying galvanic isolation and its purpose.


----------



## Rob Watts

HumanMedia said:


> Apologies, the response was mainly for the original poster ayang02 and the other poster using the default midi tools in macOS.
> And the ‘isolation’ in galvanic isolation is not isolation from noise but isolation of electrical current via a magnetic field in a transformer. if you are lucky it will give you maybe 40 or 50db noise attentuation across a certain frequency range. Low level noise in the signal will get transferred just like the signal is transferred, some high frequency noise is attenuated and other high frequency noise capacitatively couples across the windings. The better USB decrapifiers will do a lot better than this. There are many many fantastical assumptions about galvanic isolation on forums such as this and I think the misinterpretation of the word isolation Is where it comes from.



Qutest is isolated, and you are correct in that the term galvanic isolation historically implies transformers but actually does not mean solely transformers at all; however the actual implementation in Qutest is not via transformers, as the isolation via transformers is, as you state, inadequate. It is actually with high speed RF digital isolators; the reason I use the term galvanic isolation is simply that people are familiar with that term, and is de facto implied that it is *completely* isolated from low frequency noise - with completely seperate grounds - which this categorically is, plus effective isolation at RF, as the coupling capacitance from the USB to DAC is only 2pF in total across the isolating device. No competent designer in their right minds would employ transformer isolation, as this is inadequate.

Indeed, looking at the Wkipedia page for galvanic isolation we get:

"*Galvanic isolation* is a principle of isolating functional sections of electrical systems to prevent current flow; no direct conduction path is permitted.[1] Energy or information can still be exchanged between the sections by other means, such as capacitance, induction or electromagnetic waves, or by optical, acoustic or mechanical means.

Galvanic isolation is used where two or more electric circuits must communicate, but their grounds may be at different potentials. It is an effective method of breaking ground loops by preventing unwanted current from flowing between two units sharing a ground conductor. Galvanic isolation is also used for safety, preventing accidental current from reaching ground through a person's body."

The page then goes on to state the various ways of achieving galvanic isolation and these are: transformers, opto-isolators, capacitive, Hall effect and magnetoresistance. The isolation used in Qutest is similar to opto-isolation, but offers lower propagation delay, lower coupling capacitance, and better skew characteristics than opto-isolators; the process involves modulating an RF carrier in the GHz region, which is picked up internally by an RF receiver.

Surprisingly, the device I use has lower coupling capacitance than opto-couplers; but of course we still have a coupling capacitance of 2pF. That may not sound much, but at GHz frequencies it becomes significant. So to ameliorate that issue, extensive GHz isolation is performed with chip ferrites and capacitors designed for GHz isolation, so that Qutest is effectively isolated from DC to many GHz frequencies.

So you are fundamentally incorrect in suggesting that Qutest has only 40 or 50 dB of isolation; moreover USB devices will not improve the isolation, but will actually degrade overall performance as overall system RF noise levels will increase due to the unnecessary circuitry being added.


----------



## OK-Guy

Baten said:


> I just don't understand why people would attach crazy audiophile gizmo stuff on something that is already properly engineered. At ~$1800, I'd expect it to..



firstly you have to understand that snake-oil improves your hearing, you progress from there, kapish


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Mar 11, 2019)

Ross said:


> But not so fast! I tried a Matrix X-SPDIF 2 which I took from another system which does have optical output, and tried it with a cheapie optical cable. Yes, optical sounds better with the Qutest than coax from either the Matrix or the Singxer, and quite noticeably so.
> 
> Any current recommendations for optical cables?




These 2 previous posts of mine may help re optical cable suggestions;

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-868#post-14804287

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-869#post-14809348


----------



## HumanMedia (Mar 11, 2019)

Rob Watts said:


> Qutest is isolated, and you are correct in that the term galvanic isolation historically implies transformers but actually does not mean solely transformers at all; however the actual implementation in Qutest is not via transformers, as the isolation via transformers is, as you state, inadequate. It is actually with high speed RF digital isolators; the reason I use the term galvanic isolation is simply that people are familiar with that term, and is de facto implied that it is *completely* isolated from low frequency noise - with completely seperate grounds - which this categorically is, plus effective isolation at RF, as the coupling capacitance from the USB to DAC is only 2pF in total across the isolating device. No competent designer in their right minds would employ transformer isolation, as this is inadequate.
> 
> Indeed, looking at the Wkipedia page for galvanic isolation we get:
> 
> ...




@Rob Watts Huge thanks for more information on how the Qutest filters noise.

My bristling at the mention of galvanic isolation is a response to the widespread assumption that just because a device has this on their features list then the device is impervious to USB noise when in the vast majority (all?) cases it isn’t.

My comment on 40-50db was for a generic transformer, I actually assumed that the Qutest employed quite a few tricks to reduce noise and went well above and beyond a simple transformer. Again really welcome your reassuring details.

Also agree that poor decrapifiers can make the sound worse. And if some actually add noise, and that this noise ‘makes the sound worse’ then noise is still an issue? Which suggests that the Qutest is not impervious to incoming USB noise? Part of my previous point was that reducing noise before it gets to the dac is better than assuming it is all removed at the DAC. Ideally this means a lower noise source however general purpose computers are high noise sources.

A better suggestion from myself and perhaps an easier solution than finding the gems in the wide range of decrapifier products is to get a lower noise source. Personally I use a Sonore UltraRendu. Anecdotally the Intel NUCs are even better. The ultraRendu is audibly better than my macOS computer over USB.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

@Rob Watts

Rob, can you help me with advise, please? 
Right now I have Chord Qutest with Violectric V200 headphone amp. I do like both amp and DAC, but thinking about an upgrade. The obvious way would be to buy Chord TT 2 + M Scaler, but I can`t afford both right now. Would it be better to buy M Scaler for my Qutest, or I should change Qutest for TT2? I tend to buy M Scaler, because it is an interesting new technology and I`m actually quite happy with my V200 amp. But maybe I underestimate how good TT2 is? What improvements could be expected from one or another upgrade?


----------



## dawktah2

Hello ALL!

I finally took delivery of my TT2, so I'm selling my Qutest. I don't think I put 10 hours on it.


----------



## Deftone

dawktah2 said:


> Hello ALL!
> 
> I finally took delivery of my TT2, so I'm selling my Qutest. I don't think I put 10 hours on it.



Less than 10 hours with Qutest to decided you needed a TT2?


----------



## MI five

Like many have reported and from what I've tried in my set up optical is giving me the best sounding output from the Qutest.

My source is an XPS15 lap top and I started by feeding this direct into the Qutest, it was clearly a step up from the 2Qute, but like many I began to play around with other gear I had lying around.

First I tried placing an iUSB3.0 in between the lap top and the Qutest but in my set up this had little to no effect on the sound, so I then feed the Qutest with the optical output from an SP1000 and straight away there was a noticeable change and to my ears a change for the better.

Following the result with the SP1000 I got hold of a Matrix X-SPIDF 2, USB to SPDIF converter, and this like the SP1000 is giving for me a noticeably better sounding output, I'm using a Cable Talk 3 G Reference Glass Fibre optical cable between the Matrix and Qutest.

What's better well there are many here who can describe far better than me the changes they hear but briefly what I'm hearing is a better controlled bass area and highs that still have the same sparkle but are less harsh. I wouldn't go so far as to describe them as night and day changes but they are quite noticeable.

As always YMMV.


----------



## Zzt231gr

MI five said:


> Like many have reported and from what I've tried in my set up optical is giving me the best sounding output from the Qutest.
> 
> My source is an XPS15 lap top and I started by feeding this direct into the Qutest, it was clearly a step up from the 2Qute, but like many I began to play around with other gear I had lying around.
> 
> ...


I also heard much more bass depth.Check some tracks with kick drum and you'll see!


----------



## Triode User

dawktah2 said:


> Hello ALL!
> 
> I finally took delivery of my TT2, so I'm selling my Qutest. I don't think I put 10 hours on it.



After another 10 hours will you be getting Dave? You know it makes sense.


----------



## domho7

Triode User said:


> After another 10 hours will you be getting Dave? You know it makes sense.


What's the next step after dave. Maybe another 10hrs need to upgrade again.ha ha


----------



## dawktah2

Deftone said:


> Less than 10 hours with Qutest to decided you needed a TT2?



LOL, I chose getting a TT2 over getting the Prima Luna Dialogue Premium HP. Both have a remote...


----------



## Rob Watts

HumanMedia said:


> @Rob Watts Huge thanks for more information on how the Qutest filters noise.
> 
> My bristling at the mention of galvanic isolation is a response to the widespread assumption that just because a device has this on their features list then the device is impervious to USB noise when in the vast majority (all?) cases it isn’t.
> 
> ...



Yes agreed on you about galvanic isolation, as the term itself hide a multitude of sins, and can vary considerably. I once bought a galvanically isolated BNC cable adaptor, that was simply two capacitors - completely useless for RF isolation.

So Qutest provides almost perfect isolation from DC to GHz - but it's easy to short circuit the isolation externally. Imagine a mains powered source, and a mains powered USB reclocker that offered no or less than perfect isolation. That will create a ground/mains loop, with RF currents flowing around the loop; imagine that Qutest is connected to another mains powered amplifier, and we have another ground/mains loop. Now depending upon your mains wiring, these two ground/mains loops will intersect; when that happens you will get induced RF currents from the source/USB reclocker loop; and so the Qutest galvanic isolation has now been impaired, as noise from the source is induced into Qutest. And it would not matter if the reclocker was optical to Qutest, as the RF current injection is via ground/mains. But remove the reclocker and we no longer have the source loop and so RF noise can't interfere into the Qutest amplifier ground/mains loop. So this is an example of a reclocker actually raising system noise. This is why I was careful in my post to define it as overall system noise. Moreover, actual audio bandwidth noise is irrelevant; it's RF noise that we are concerned about with source components.



Ragnar-BY said:


> @Rob Watts
> 
> Rob, can you help me with advise, please?
> Right now I have Chord Qutest with Violectric V200 headphone amp. I do like both amp and DAC, but thinking about an upgrade. The obvious way would be to buy Chord TT 2 + M Scaler, but I can`t afford both right now. Would it be better to buy M Scaler for my Qutest, or I should change Qutest for TT2? I tend to buy M Scaler, because it is an interesting new technology and I`m actually quite happy with my V200 amp. But maybe I underestimate how good TT2 is? What improvements could be expected from one or another upgrade?



You will of course get unique benefits in using the M scaler, as it does things to musicality that nothing else touches, due to the better than 16 bit reconstruction of the original analogue signal in the ADC. But you will also get big transparency benefits from the shear reduction in components that eliminating an external amp will give you; I can't give you a hard and fast answer to your question of which will be most important- except perhaps suggesting that one day you absolutely will be getting an M scaler! 

My advice is to find a good dealer and try for yourself.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Rob Watts said:


> You will of course get unique benefits in using the M scaler, as it does things to musicality that nothing else touches, due to the better than 16 bit reconstruction of the original analogue signal in the ADC. But you will also get big transparency benefits from the shear reduction in components that eliminating an external amp will give you; I can't give you a hard and fast answer to your question of which will be most important- except perhaps suggesting that one day you absolutely will be getting an M scaler!


Thank you. I think I will buy both sooner or later, but start with M Scaler.

By the way, if TT2 and Qutest are used as DACs with M Scaler and external amp, the only difference would be a better PSU in TT2? Or there are more differences?


----------



## nick77

dawktah2 said:


> Hello ALL!
> 
> I finally took delivery of my TT2, so I'm selling my Qutest. I don't think I put 10 hours on it.



Please share your thoughts between the TT2 and Qutest. ??


----------



## Rob Watts (Mar 13, 2019)

Ragnar-BY said:


> Thank you. I think I will buy both sooner or later, but start with M Scaler.
> 
> By the way, if TT2 and Qutest are used as DACs with M Scaler and external amp, the only difference would be a better PSU in TT2? Or there are more differences?



There are a lot more differences apart from the PSU - on the DAC side, it has better noise shapers on the FPGA (better depth and detail resolution) very much more advanced reference circuitry (taken from Dave, giving a darker and more full bodied SQ). On the analog side we have the second order analogue noise shaper topology, which eliminates HF distortion, and allows no high frequency distortion at all once a load is attached.

But of course the biggest benefit is the simplification of your analogue path - TT2 is an order of magnitude simpler than Qutest + headphone amp, so the connection from digital to transducer is fundamentally more direct. A more direct connection is much more transparent; plus the distortion and noise will be very much lower than with an external amp.


----------



## Qute Beats

I'm looking at a small form factor pc, preferably fanless, to use as dedicated music player to replace laptop.  I saw the Intel NUC has optical out, but has CPU fan I believe.  Anyone used a NUC optical out with Qutest with good results?  Is it quiet?


----------



## miketlse (Mar 13, 2019)

Qute Beats said:


> I'm looking at a small form factor pc, preferably fanless, to use as dedicated music player to replace laptop.  I saw the Intel NUC has optical out, but has CPU fan I believe.  Anyone used a NUC optical out with Qutest with good results?  Is it quiet?


There are several owners posting about their experiences using NUC units (some of them fanless), so a search of the Chord threads using the term NUC, should bring you some interesting info to read.
I will try and add some links later.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.831345/page-318#post-13560000


----------



## dawktah2

nick77 said:


> Please share your thoughts between the TT2 and Qutest. ??



Let me do a specific comparison and give impressions


----------



## dawktah2

Qute Beats said:


> I'm looking at a small form factor pc, preferably fanless, to use as dedicated music player to replace laptop.  I saw the Intel NUC has optical out, but has CPU fan I believe.  Anyone used a NUC optical out with Qutest with good results?  Is it quiet?



I've built a few shuttle computers, never used one in an audio setup. Fanless and designed to fit in VESA mount


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Rob Watts said:


> There are a lot more differences apart from the PSU - on the DAC side, it has better noise shapers on the FPGA (better depth and detail resolution) very much more advanced reference circuitry (taken from Dave, giving a darker and more full bodied SQ). On the analog side we have the second order analogue noise shaper topology, which eliminates HF distortion, and allows no high frequency distortion at all once a load is attached.
> 
> But of course the biggest benefit is the simplification of your analogue path - TT2 is an order of magnitude simpler than Qutest + headphone amp, so the connection from digital to transducer is fundamentally more direct. A more direct connection is much more transparent; plus the distortion and noise will be very much lower than with an external amp.


Thank you for clarification. I assume further questions should be asked in a TT2 thread.


----------



## Jon L

Rob Watts said:


> A more direct connection is much more transparent; plus the distortion and noise will be very much lower than with an external amp.



In the spirit of more direct connection, I have now managed to get rid of both USB cable and spdif cable from my digital setup.  CAPS v.3 server->USB A-B adapter->DXIO usb-spdif converter->RCA to BNC adapter->Qutest.  
I can say two things:  I no longer need Qutest's "Warm" filter; It can be depressing to be able to compare a cable with "no cable."  




0313191326 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## Qute Beats

Jon L said:


> In the spirit of more direct connection, I have now managed to get rid of both USB cable and spdif cable from my digital setup.  CAPS v.3 server->USB A-B adapter->DXIO usb-spdif converter->RCA to BNC adapter->Qutest.
> I can say two things:  I no longer need Qutest's "Warm" filter; It can be depressing to be able to compare a cable with "no cable."
> 
> 
> ...


no cable is the best cable.  Now, how short a USB cable could you use there and how would it compare I wonder?  Since isn't this set up still USB based as in USB from PC, so does not USB-USB do away with the converter??  Just curious as those SPIDF boxes are expensive.


----------



## ATXKyle

Qute Beats said:


> no cable is the best cable.  Now, how short a USB cable could you use there and how would it compare I wonder?  Since isn't this set up still USB based as in USB from PC, so does not USB-USB do away with the converter??  Just curious as those SPIDF boxes are expensive.



The UpTone Audio USPCB is another way to get rid of the cable via the USB.  It’s cheap and for me sounded better than my expensive Curious USB cable. Trick is dimensions ... it’s short so your streamer/server USB out has to sit very close to the DAC USB in.


----------



## Qute Beats

ATXKyle said:


> The UpTone Audio USPCB is another way to get rid of the cable via the USB.  It’s cheap and for me sounded better than my expensive Curious USB cable. Trick is dimensions ... it’s short so your streamer/server USB out has to sit very close to the DAC USB in.


just had a look at that, interesting, though certainly is short.


----------



## Jon L

I just tried to order the UpTone USPCB and it was over $40 after tax (CA) and cheapest shipping option.  
The USB adapter I used has even shorter signal path and is sturdier, and it comes free in the box of original UpTone Regen, which many of you probably already have...




REGENadapter by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## OctavianH

Anyone had the change to compare ISO/USB regen with the JCAT?


----------



## Baten

OctavianH said:


> Anyone had the change to compare ISO/USB regen with the JCAT?


JCat is just an intona in another casing. Maybe you can find comparison between regen and intona more easily


----------



## OctavianH

As far as I knew Intona was just providing isolation, the ISO Regen and JCAT are also reclocking. Maybe I am wrong.


----------



## Baten (Mar 14, 2019)

OctavianH said:


> As far as I knew Intona was just providing isolation, the ISO Regen and JCAT are also reclocking. Maybe I am wrong.


Jcat/Intona is the same technology  both reclock the usb data stream.

From Intona:
_The 7054-based USB Hi-Speed Isolator is a phy-level receiver/isolator/reclocker/repacketizer working at a bidirectional bandwidth of 480 MBit/s.
It receives and transmits USB data using a dedicated ULPI-transceiver, buffers and translates by our proprietary logic using FPGA technology and isolates using industry-leading RF-type isolators by Silicon Labs with least possible capacitance.
It does not translate or distort data packets like a hub but does reproduce and reclock the original data by 100%.

*Is there any customization possible, for example using a better oscillator?*
What would you expect by using a “better” oscillator?

We measured 12.5ps of RMS jitter on the USB packet clock. A more or less jittery oscillator would not make any difference on this, because of the very low tuned lp-filter in the transceiver’s PLL.

We use four clocks in our design, all shifted slightly in phase and affected from natural spread spectrum of the isolator chips and other sources. This really helps to bring EMI down and to spread current peaks – e.g. to lower the packet noise.
If we would tune everything inside to least jitter, this would rise packet noise and also EMI radiation.

One need to distinguish between


sample clock in an ADC or DAC: low jitter is the most important, because only the right sample at the right time is the right sample
transmission clock of a serial system: BER (bit error rate) or eye mask to be specified
clock passing integrated logic: setup and hold times to be met
We decided to go for low noise, so spreading clocks and accepting inter-logic-skew was the way to go. Further, clever design of return currents and also a good and low impedance decoupling network of the power supplies are by far more important to meet your needs than looking for the oscillator.
_


----------



## STR-1 (Mar 14, 2019)

Jon L said:


> The USB adapter I used has even shorter signal path and is sturdier, and it comes free in the box of original UpTone Regen, which many of you probably already have...


I’ve used both USB adapters, and the USPCB is clearly better.  For those you have the USPCB and haven’t tried this, do try with the 5v power switched off when used between the source and USB regenerator (e.g. ISO Regen).  It sounded even cleaner in my system.


----------



## OctavianH

STR-1 said:


> I’ve used both USB adapters, and the USPCB is clearly better.  For those you have the USPCB and haven’t tried this, do try with the 5v power switched off when used between the source and USB regenerator (e.g. ISO Regen).  It sounded even cleaner in my system.



I tried this and had a problem. When Vbus was OFF on the USPCB the Qutest was not seen on my PC. Are you able to use Qutest via USB with Vbus OFF?


----------



## STR-1

OctavianH said:


> I tried this and had a problem. When Vbus was OFF on the USPCB the Qutest was not seen on my PC. Are you able to use Qutest via USB with Vbus OFF?


I do not have a Qutest.  Using either DAVE or Hugo TT 2 as the DAC, both of these need the 5v on the USB input for handshake purposes.  I assume this is the same for the Qutest.  So if I am running USB straight from my Innuos Zenith SE server to the DAC, 5v must be switched on (actually the USPCB is too short for me to use as a connector in this configuration, but it would be the same for any USB cable).  However, if I use a USB regenerator between server and DAC (I have both ISO regen and tX-USBultra - currently using the latter) I can switch 5v off between server and regenerator, as long as 5v is switched on between regenerator and DAC.


----------



## miketlse

OctavianH said:


> I tried this and had a problem. When Vbus was OFF on the USPCB the Qutest was not seen on my PC. Are you able to use Qutest via USB with Vbus OFF?


To reinforce what @STR-1 posted, the chord dacs tend to use the 5V VBUS to indicate that the USD data port is active.
If the VBUS reads 0V, the data port is identified as inactive, and then switched off. This will be the point at which your PC can no longer see the Qutest.


----------



## Jon L

miketlse said:


> To reinforce what @STR-1 posted, the chord dacs tend to use the 5V VBUS to indicate that the USD data port is active.
> If the VBUS reads 0V, the data port is identified as inactive, and then switched off. This will be the point at which your PC can no longer see the Qutest.



So Chord DAC's are unlike some DAC's that only require 5V VBUS for initial handshake but will keep on working if 5V is turned off later?


----------



## miketlse

Jon L said:


> So Chord DAC's are unlike some DAC's that only require 5V VBUS for initial handshake but will keep on working if 5V is turned off later?


Best to check the @Rob Watts posts on the subject.


----------



## kumar402

I am very close on getting this DAC but it seems to be sold out right now and dealers are awaiting shipment.


----------



## domho7

kumar402 said:


> I am very close on getting this DAC but it seems to be sold out right now and dealers are awaiting shipment.


It's hot stuff. I prefer it to Hugo2.


----------



## Staxaphone

I just took delivery of my Qutest and find the sound to be great right out of the box using the supplied Chord wall wort.  But I also own an iso regen with LPS-1 PS.  I was thinking of using the the LPS-1 to power the Qutest and compare sound to the supplied Chord WW.  But the LPS-1 is supplied with an output cable having 2.1mm connectors at both ends.  I searched on-line but could not find a 2.1mm to micro usb adapter as required for input on the Qutest.  For those of you using the Uptone PS on the Qutest, could you please advise where you procured your adapter.  Thanks.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 16, 2019)

Rob Watts said:


> But remove the reclocker and we no longer have the source loop and so RF noise can't interfere into the Qutest amplifier ground/mains loop.



Hi Rob, in this example though, while you've removed one loop by removing the USB reclocker, let's say you are left with 3 x SMPS's and the USB source is earthed and integrated amplifier is earthed...

The USB galvanic isolation of Qutest can still be defeated here right, as the ground currents / leakage currents can see go through Qutest and amp?

Sometimes when I think about the different paths these currents can go I wonder how important galvanic isolation is in the big scheme? Sure you may block these currents on USB input but they still have a pathway via PSU's (including Qutest's?)?

Especially if the system has bad grounding overall, i.e. multiple earthed SMPS's?


----------



## STR-1

Jon L said:


> So Chord DAC's are unlike some DAC's that only require 5V VBUS for initial handshake but will keep on working if 5V is turned off later?


Yes.  The moment you switch off 5V, tne Chord DAC will stop working.


----------



## Nik74

What RCA interconnects are you people using from your Qutest to your amplifier? I have the same cables that I bought 20 plus years ago and I m ready for something new.I m sure cable technology can't have moved on all that much since then  but with how my rig is shaping up I will need an extra pair of analogue cables anyway  I have the Chord Shawline in mind and I m thinking about something that wouldn't be over £200, any suggestions will be appreciated.


----------



## OctavianH

I use here Chord Clearway and they are quite good. At least for my taste.


----------



## betula

Nik74 said:


> What RCA interconnects are you people using from your Qutest to your amplifier? I have the same cables that I bought 20 plus years ago and I m ready for something new.I m sure cable technology can't have moved on all that much since then  but with how my rig is shaping up I will need an extra pair of analogue cables anyway  I have the Chord Shawline in mind and I m thinking about something that wouldn't be over £200, any suggestions will be appreciated.


I use very short QED Qunex 2 White RCAs. Under £20 secondhand and I am perfectly happy.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Nik74 said:


> What RCA interconnects are you people using from your Qutest to your amplifier? I have the same cables that I bought 20 plus years ago and I m ready for something new.I m sure cable technology can't have moved on all that much since then  but with how my rig is shaping up I will need an extra pair of analogue cables anyway  I have the Chord Shawline in mind and I m thinking about something that wouldn't be over £200, any suggestions will be appreciated.


I`ve tried different interconnects and ended up with AudioQuest Water. Expensive, but definitely worth it.


----------



## nick77

Staxaphone said:


> I just took delivery of my Qutest and find the sound to be great right out of the box using the supplied Chord wall wort.  But I also own an iso regen with LPS-1 PS.  I was thinking of using the the LPS-1 to power the Qutest and compare sound to the supplied Chord WW.  But the LPS-1 is supplied with an output cable having 2.1mm connectors at both ends.  I searched on-line but could not find a 2.1mm to micro usb adapter as required for input on the Qutest.  For those of you using the Uptone PS on the Qutest, could you please advise where you procured your adapter.  Thanks.



I am using this one.  

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Micro-USB-...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649


----------



## SoundeScapes

Ragnar-BY said:


> I`ve tried different interconnects and ended up with AudioQuest Water. Expensive, but definitely worth it.



I use AQ Water too. I don’t know if it’s because of their DBS system but it was a clear step up compared to their cables without it.
And also a clear step up from other cables I tried at the time: QED, Eichmann and a few others.
To me the musical presentation became calmer and more natural. Some of the digital harshness that is so difficult to get completely rid of were removed.


----------



## Staxaphone

nick77 said:


> I am using this one.
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/Micro-USB-5-Pin-Male-To-5-5-x-2-1mm-Female-DC-Power-Converter-Charger-Adapter/182476799414?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649



Thanks!  I'll order one today. The Qutest sounds so good now that can't imagine much improvement using a LPS but my curiosity must be satisfied!  FYI my computer headphone system consists of: HP PC running JRMC 22.0.108 - USB to Qutest ('red' filter) - Audience RCA to Questyle 600i - Phono out to Focal Utopia.


----------



## Staxaphone

One other question.  I am currently using the ASIO Chord 1.5 driver because I have DSD iso files that I listen to often.  But I have many times more PCM flac files in my music library.  While the flac albums sound great using the ASIO driver, I can select from three other drivers:

Digital Output (Chord Async USB 44.1kHz - 768kHz [WASAPI]

Chord Electronics Ltd. Streaming [Kernal Streaming]

Digital Output (Chord Async USB 44.1kHz - 768kHz) [Direct Sound]

I have listened a bit with the Direct Sound driver option but really did not notice a difference in sound character.  Is there actually any difference between these drivers with regard to sound quality or theoretical digital performance?  Thanks.


----------



## Rob Watts

Jon L said:


> So Chord DAC's are unlike some DAC's that only require 5V VBUS for initial handshake but will keep on working if 5V is turned off later?



Yes the USB VBUS powers the USB decoder and the source side of the galvanic isolator. The benefit of this approach is the USB device whilst decoding creates RF noise and correlated and distorted noise, so keeping that device away from the DACs ground plane is key here. As far as the FPGA is concerned it merely sees I2S type data, where the data clock comes from the FPGA, so the FPGA has the minimum amount of processing to do and being (almost completely) immune from source noise.



Em2016 said:


> Hi Rob, in this example though, while you've removed one loop by removing the USB reclocker, let's say you are left with 3 x SMPS's and the USB source is earthed and integrated amplifier is earthed...
> 
> The USB galvanic isolation of Qutest can still be defeated here right, as the ground currents / leakage currents can see go through Qutest and amp?
> 
> ...



Galvanic isolation is absolutely crucial in the scheme of things; what we are talking here are second order or more accurately third order effects. My job is to make the quality of the source (with bit perfect data of course) become irrelevant to ensure maximum overall performance; and I am not quite there yet as sources still do make a difference. So given that source jitter certainly is irrelevant, then the only thing that can make a difference is RF and correlated noise being injected into the DACs ground plane. The only way this can happen with the galvanic isolation and the RF filtering built is is via external ground loops and currents being induced into the ground and mains. What I am trying to get over is adding extra complexity to the source will actually make matters worse, as you are creating ground loops that didn't exist; the resultant performance may be easily mistaken for an improvement - increased perceived width because the depth has collapsed, a brighter more analytical SQ due to more noise floor modulation - but of course degraded timbre variation, more listening fatigue and things being perceived to be louder.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 16, 2019)

Rob Watts said:


> What I am trying to get over is adding extra complexity to the source will actually make matters worse, as you are creating ground loops that didn't exist



I absolutely agree with this.

I guess my only point (and it's not even your problem of course) is if someone (for example only) connects Qutest to an earthed USB source and earthed preamp then the USB galvanic isolation of Qutest will essentially be defeated as both sides of USB interface are connected to earth, no?

But as mentioned, this is not your problem to worry about. You are dead right (of course!) when you say "My job is to make the quality of the source (with bit perfect data of course) become irrelevant".

How we integrate your gear is out of your control.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Rob Watts said:


> What I am trying to get over is adding extra complexity to the source will actually make matters worse, as you are creating ground loops that didn't exist; the resultant performance may be easily mistaken for an improvement - increased perceived width because the depth has collapsed, a brighter more analytical SQ due to more noise floor modulation - but of course degraded timbre variation, more listening fatigue and things being perceived to be louder.


You’ve did a great job, Rob. I have used various decrapifiers with my other DACs and it gave some improvements, but Qutest is best on it’s own. It was hard to believe at first and I spent a lot of time testing it, but after all my ears confirmed that you are absolutely right about “false improvements” from RF noise.


----------



## Rob Watts

Em2016 said:


> I absolutely agree with this.
> 
> I guess my only point (and it's not even your problem of course) is if someone (for example only) connects Qutest to an earthed USB source and earthed preamp then the USB galvanic isolation of Qutest will essentially be defeated as both sides of USB interface are connected to earth, no?
> 
> ...



Actually you are OK in the instance of one earthed/mains powered component on source side and one on the Qutest output side; you may think you are shorting out the galvanic isolation (and indeed you are) but there will be no current flow through the isolation and into Qutest ground plane - hence everything will be OK. You have a piece of wire that's not connected, so no current can flow through the isolation loop. We need a current flow to happen for problems to occur, and this won't happen in this instance. You will only get current to flow if there is a mains/earth loop through Qutest and it's output, and this loop being intersected with another source loop; if the source is not looped (that is a single source with one sole connection to ground/mains then no current will flow in the Qutest output loop, and hence Qutest can't see any noise as there is no current flow to create voltages within Qutest's ground plane.

I know it's not easy to understand this, it took me some time to figure it out!


----------



## Ivodam

Hi everybody,

I am new to this forum and this thread. I decided to join, since I have owned for some months now the Chord Qutest dac.
I am very happy with its performance, but I have some questions as well.
I have read a bit through this thread now and saw that some of my questions and findings have already been discussed here.
My "workflow" is the following (I listen to floorstanders): laptop running Win 10, Foobar software player - Qutest over USB - directly into power amp Moon W 3.5 RS.
Volume control is done within the Foobar. All cables - USB, RCA and speaker cables are from the Chord Company (this is another British company). 
I have tried different combinations  - through preamp to power amp , connected to integrated amp, volume control through a passive attenuator.
The best solution is direct connection to the power amp - beautiful transparent sound.
About the power supply - I use a simple battery power bank, to my subjective perception it sounds a bit better.

I listen to highly detailed and multilayered music: symphonies and German opera. I find the Qutest just marvelous for my musical taste.

Only problem I have at the moment is the direct - so-called native reproduction of DSD files with the Foobar. I have downloaded Chord's official ASIO driver
from Chord's Website and have installed the relevant ASIO plugins in the Foobar, still when choosing DSD output I get distorted sound. 
Some friends of mine tried to help, but there seems to be the problem that Chord's ASIO driver does not have any control panel, or I have not been able
to find it and to make the proper adjustments.
Anyone with Qutest and Foobar experience here?

P.S.: Of course, I have not been able to read the whole thread - if this subject about native DSD and ASIO drivers has been discussed already, please just let me know -
I will find it.


----------



## nick77

I read a post earlier in the thread about isolation and Herbies Tenderfeet. Isolation products can get crazy pricey but wanting to give it a shot I contacted Herbie and he recommended the Baby Booties. I was a bit skeptical but the price was right so I purchased 4 pieces. I am pleasantly surprised by a real nice bump in focus, and improved imaging. They fit nicely and well worth the price of entry.


----------



## flyte3333 (Mar 16, 2019)

Rob Watts said:


> Actually you are OK in the instance of one earthed/mains powered component on source side and one on the Qutest output side; you may think you are shorting out the galvanic isolation (and indeed you are) but there will be no current flow through the isolation and into Qutest ground plane - hence everything will be OK. You have a piece of wire that's not connected, so no current can flow through the isolation loop. We need a current flow to happen for problems to occur, and this won't happen in this instance. You will only get current to flow if there is a mains/earth loop through Qutest and it's output, and this loop being intersected with another source loop; if the source is not looped (that is a single source with one sole connection to ground/mains then no current will flow in the Qutest output loop, and hence Qutest can't see any noise as there is no current flow to create voltages within Qutest's ground plane.
> 
> I know it's not easy to understand this, it took me some time to figure it out!



Thanks Rob.

Next question is genuinely for my learning purposes (not for being a pain in the a$$) but aren’t things further complicated because these leakage currents can also travel through the AC neutral wire, like Qutest’s SMPS?

From what I read by John Swenson, they don’t necessarily have to travel through an earth wire of a PSU...

So Qutest’s SMPS can still form part of a loop, and ground currents can still get into Qutest’s ground plane, for the example where USB source and amp are earthed? Or maybe they don’t even need to be earthed.

John S has said we would be surprised to know the different paths these leakage currents can take to get through our DAC and other AC powered analogue electronics.

Of course with a Hugo TT2 directly driving headphones or passive speakers, then the built-in USB galvanic isolation does indeed block this single loop. So no worries.

But Qutest obviously is not designed to directly drive cans or passive speakers, so naturally needs to be connected to more mains connected stuff, which naturally complicates things.

Again, it’s not your problem to have to worry about everyone’s potential system issues but I do like trying to learn about this stuff , which can get complicated as you said.

Cheers again!


----------



## Tobes (Mar 23, 2019)

I'm a new Qutest owner only had it 4 days and still experimenting.

My setup is in the signature below and I've done some comparisons with the Benchmark DAC3 using various setups with either Roon or Audirvana players on my Mac Mini.
Since I already owned an iFi 5V iPower plug pack, I started listening to the Qutest via that.
Most of my initial findings were via my speaker setup, but listening via the HPA4/Utopias confirmed differences were consistent in the HP setup.

Initially I compared both dacs in Roon - feeding both native (predominately 44.1) rates. All DSP/filters in Roon disabled. USB connection from the Mac to both dacs via the iFi usb3 decrapifier.
I briefly played with the Qutest filters and quickly established the Incisive/Neutral filter sounded best to me.
In this scenario I preferred the Qutest. Among other things the DAC3 had some hardness on vocal peaks that was absent from the Qutest.

Next, I configured the Benchmark in Hqplayer upsampling to 176/192 using one the closed form filters, still using Roon as the player. The Qutest was still getting native rates from Roon.
This swung the comparison back towards the DAC3, which lost the hardness above and sounded better organised/defined and a touch more clarity than the Qutest.
I tried the Qutest with Hqplayer but, at least with the filters I tried, this made the Qutest sound worse.

Then I configured the Qutest in Audirvana (no upsampling) comparing to DAC3 with Roon/HQplayer (with upsampling above).
Now this was harder to choose - both excellent.

Just for fun I thought I would try powering the Qutest form the second output of my Uptone JS2 LPS (outputs individually adjustable to 5, 7, 9, 12V - Mac Mini already powered from one dc output). I wasn't expecting much from this as iFi seem to think LPS is much noisier than their SMPS.
Wow. This takes the Qutest to another level. Greater clarity and size to the sound field and greater solidity/physicality to instruments/voices. Not subtle at all.
For now, the Qutest is my clear preference over the DAC3.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/upuvj6vjpq3eutv/20190317_132158.jpg?dl=0

EDIT: So I went back to confirm my observations of last night - using Qutest in Audirvana (no upsampling) comparing to DAC3 with Roon/HQplayer (with upsampling above). With this setup I can switch with a single button on the HPA4. After flicking back and forth I had to trim the Qutest level back by 1dB.
Not sure if I messed up a setting with Hqplayer, but now the DAC3 has a hair more transparency, letting through a shade more textural detail. Perhaps because of this the Qutest can sound a tad smoother/sweeter. Also the Qutest can come through with more percussive 'thwack' on some music.

One other thing worth mentioning - interconnects. I'm using the Wireworld Eclipse 7 with the Qutest and pretty low cost pro Mogami Gold Studio XLR with the DAC3. Perhaps a different i/c with the Qutest could get better results(?).

FWIW I ended up returning my Qutest as, in the final wash-up, the DAC3 was consistently more transparent _in my system_.


----------



## azabu

If you like the Qutest with the JS-2, try it with the LPS 1.2. 

It's a match made in heaven


----------



## Jon L

nick77 said:


> I contacted Herbie and he recommended the Baby Booties. I was a bit skeptical but the price was right so I purchased 4 pieces. I am pleasantly surprised by a real nice bump in focus, and improved imaging. They fit nicely and well worth the price of entry.



I just remembered I have both Herbie Tenderfeet and Baby Booties somewhere in my house and will try to find them.  However, IME, vast majority of isolation devices tend to improve some aspects while other aspects well...change.  Whenever certain footers improve focus and imaging IME, they tend to decrease density and warmth.  How do Baby Booties do in this aspect?  
P.S. I am talking about my speaker system mainly...


----------



## Qute Beats

Nik74 said:


> What RCA interconnects are you people using from your Qutest to your amplifier? I have the same cables that I bought 20 plus years ago and I m ready for something new.I m sure cable technology can't have moved on all that much since then  but with how my rig is shaping up I will need an extra pair of analogue cables anyway  I have the Chord Shawline in mind and I m thinking about something that wouldn't be over £200, any suggestions will be appreciated.


If still looking, I use Chord Shawline after moving up from C-line and very pleased with improvements, especially in the bass.  Bought mine 2nd hand for £100 rather than the £200 list price.


----------



## dj1978

Tobes said:


> Wow. This takes the Qutest to another level. Greater clarity and size to the sound field and greater solidity/physicality to instruments/voices. Not subtle at all.
> For now, the Qutest is my clear preference over the DAC3.
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/upuvj6vjpq3eutv/20190317_132158.jpg?dl=0



I agree with this opinion. I use a line power supply and the M2Tech Hiface Evo Two USB converter. This brings Qutest at least two levels higher. The sound is amazing.


----------



## HumanMedia (Mar 17, 2019)

azabu said:


> If you like the Qutest with the JS-2, try it with the LPS 1.2.
> It's a match made in heaven



What was improved over the JS-2 powering the Qutest?
And enough to warrant the upgrade?
(Another JS-2 owner here)


----------



## Tobes (Mar 17, 2019)

azabu said:


> If you like the Qutest with the JS-2, try it with the LPS 1.2.
> 
> It's a match made in heaven



My concern with LPS 1.2 would be current output.
Uptone states the LPS has "Maximum guaranteed output current" of 1.1A.
Although you report good results, the plug pack supplied with the Qutest is 5V/2.1A.
However I don't know what the actual power _requirement_ is for the Qutest (not specified) - and not knowing I wouldn't choose a PS offering less current than the one Chord provides.

I have another option. The iFi usb3 hub/decrapifier can supply a super regulated 2.5A@5V - so I could run the Qutest off one of the 'power only' usb-A sockets.


----------



## claud W

Qute Beats said:


> If still looking, I use Chord Shawline after moving up from C-line and very pleased with improvements, especially in the bass.  Bought mine 2nd hand for £100 rather than the £200 list price.


WyWires Silver interconnects and their Platinum USB cord. Sounds great with my Liquid Carbon amp.


----------



## SoundeScapes

Rob Watts said:


> A 2A supply is shipped with qutest, but it will work fine with a 1A 5V supply.
> 
> To set the OP voltage you press the two buttons together when it's starting up - display in rainbow mode - then qutest will remain in that level. Pressing the buttons together will change the brightness of the display when in normal or working mode.



1A should be enough according to Rob (post #23).


----------



## azabu

HumanMedia said:


> What was improved over the JS-2 powering the Qutest?
> And enough to warrant the upgrade?
> (Another JS-2 owner here)



I have the JS-2 (two) and LPS 1.2, also SR4 incoming this month. 

The LPS 1.2 is quieter, with more detail retrieval and nuance than JS-2 when powering the Qutest. The JS-2 powers the SOtM ultra components.


----------



## azabu

Tobes said:


> My concern with LPS 1.2 would be current output.
> Uptone states the LPS has "Maximum guaranteed output current" of 1.1A.
> Although you report good results, the plug pack supplied with the Qutest is 5V/2.1A.
> However I don't know what the actual power _requirement_ is for the Qutest (not specified) - and not knowing I wouldn't choose a PS offering less current than the one Chord provides.
> ...



LPS 1.2 powers the Qutest without any issues.


----------



## Nik74

@Ragnar-BY , @Qute Beats @betula , @OctavianH , @SoundeScapes , thanks for your sugestions. Audioquest Water is well off budget currently but the Shawline from Chord Company looks enticing and under £200


----------



## Tobes

SoundeScapes said:


> 1A should be enough according to Rob (post #23).


Thanks for finding that. Good to know.


----------



## Rob Watts

Em2016 said:


> Thanks Rob.
> 
> Next question is genuinely for my learning purposes (not for being a pain in the a$$) but aren’t things further complicated because these leakage currents can also travel through the AC neutral wire, like Qutest’s SMPS?
> 
> ...



Hmm. Yes your right this subject can get complex! Ok firstly there is no ground with the supplied Qutest PSU; and that is done on purpose, as it eliminates the possibility of ground loops. So no worries it's not a problem then?

Not quite. On my posts back to you earlier I kept saying ground/mains loops; and for sure ground loops are the major issue, as it's a low impedance direct connection. The problem with a non ground connected PSU is much smaller again, as it is capacitively coupled to the mains and then to ground via the PSU transformer; so here we have the *possibility* of another loop; but it's capacitive, so only applies with RF signals, not leakage currents in the audio bandwidth. Clearly having as low as possible mains coupling capacitance will be good; so we need a PSU that has a low interwinding transformer capacitance - and guess what, the lowest capacitance are found on those awful SMPS - those pesky small mickey mouse things that audiophiles think are poor.

Also - the capacitive problem only applies at RF, and guess what - you can use RF filters to further isolate the effects of the coupling capacitance -  I have proven this via SPICE modelling, an RF PSU filter can be made to isolate the capacitive coupling to ensure that the mains loop is broken - no RF current can flow via this loop. and Qutest is full of RF filters to isolate the RF and capacitive coupling from the mains.

And guess what - those awful SMPS that audiophiles say are poor have RF filters built in - audiophile linear PSUs do not.

But if you are worried about the mains loop then a simple way is to use a USB battery power pack. That will completely eliminate the issue, as it's totally isolated from the mains. My own listening tests revealed tiny differences by replacing the Qutest PSU with a battery - but that was with my setup so YMMV.


----------



## flyte3333

Rob Watts said:


> Hmm. Yes your right this subject can get complex! Ok firstly there is no ground with the supplied Qutest PSU; and that is done on purpose, as it eliminates the possibility of ground loops. So no worries it's not a problem then?
> 
> Not quite. On my posts back to you earlier I kept saying ground/mains loops; and for sure ground loops are the major issue, as it's a low impedance direct connection. The problem with a non ground connected PSU is much smaller again, as it is capacitively coupled to the mains and then to ground via the PSU transformer; so here we have the *possibility* of another loop; but it's capacitive, so only applies with RF signals, not leakage currents in the audio bandwidth. Clearly having as low as possible mains coupling capacitance will be good; so we need a PSU that has a low interwinding transformer capacitance - and guess what, the lowest capacitance are found on those awful SMPS - those pesky small mickey mouse things that audiophiles think are poor.
> 
> ...



Cheers Rob! I know it must feel like a drag to type out these long explanations but I can promise you these explanations are greatly appreciated by many here.


----------



## Rob Watts

No worries; trying to explain things as simply as I can often focuses one's mind on the problem at hand.

And most of my waking time (and some sleeping time too) is about thinking about designing audio, and enjoying the musical benefits, so I do enjoy posting and attending CanJams.


----------



## domho7

Rob Watts said:


> No worries; trying to explain things as simply as I can often focuses one's mind on the problem at hand.
> 
> And most of my waking time (and some sleeping time too) is about thinking about designing audio, and enjoying the musical benefits, so I do enjoy posting and attending CanJams.


Hi Rob. 
I am not sure whether to go for a qutest or Hugo2.
Presently I am playing mainly with iems and headphones.
I also have a Aroma amp + psu.
As I have Ltd space at home I can't go for those desk top sizes dac or amps.
Tks for reading.


----------



## Focux

hey all, 

could anyone shed light as to how this setup might work out?

Macbook to Qutest to JDS Atom to headphones

using mojo to atom now and would like even more detail going forward but would like to spend less than what a hugo 2 would cost

i read that the qutest has the same chip as hugo 2?


----------



## x RELIC x (Mar 19, 2019)

Focux said:


> hey all,
> 
> could anyone shed light as to how this setup might work out?
> 
> ...



I haven’t heard the Qutest, but do have the Hugo2 and the Mojo. The FPGA is the same in the Qutest as Hugo2, as well as the 10e Pulse Array DAC. The analogue output is based on the Mojo so, in my mind, I imagine it might sound like a combination of the Mojo and Hugo2.

I know, not very helpful for your decision making but thought you should know where the hardware similarities are since you mentioned the same chip (it’s a lot more complicated than a chip by the way).


----------



## betula

Focux said:


> hey all,
> 
> could anyone shed light as to how this setup might work out?
> 
> ...


Qutest has the same chip as Hugo2. Qutest is a big upgrade compared to Mojo.


----------



## Focux (Mar 19, 2019)

betula said:


> Qutest has the same chip as Hugo2. Qutest is a big upgrade compared to Mojo.





x RELIC x said:


> I haven’t heard the Qutest, but do have the Hugo2 and the Mojo. The FPGA is the same in the Qutest as Hugo2, as well as the 10e Pulse Array DAC. The analogue output is based on the Mojo so, in my mind, I imagine it might sound like a combination of the Mojo and Hugo2.
> 
> I know, not very helpful for your decision making but thought you should know where the hardware similarities are since you mentioned the same chip (it’s a lot more complicated than a chip by the way).



thank you both

yes i noticed the chip was the same but did not realise other differences/similarities, thank you for pointing that out

i was following darko's most bang for buck recommendation of AFO and Hugo 2

since i just bought the atom and wanted more detail, i tot perhaps upgrading my mojo might be a good idea

instead of spending a 3k+ on a hugo 2 which kinda would be too weak for 650?

i really did enjoy the 650 much more only after adding the atom

previously 650 was so veiled with mojo alone

Edit: if there’s a similar alternative to Qutest or Hugo 2 but cheaper, I’d be happy to take a look!


----------



## x RELIC x

Focux said:


> thank you both
> 
> yes i noticed the chip was the same but did not realise other differences/similarities, thank you for pointing that out
> 
> ...



Have you considered different headphones?

Personally, I find the HD650 veiled. I know, many will say just add the right amp but I never really got along with them. Regarding the Qutest it likely will be better sounding to you but the Atom amp will also add it’s own flavour which might mask some of the differences between the Mojo and the Qutest so there’s that to consider. That’s why I’m thinking different headphones, just as an idea. Of course I’m not debating your Atom amp’s quality or your personal preference,  but just adding an alternative.

Regarding the Hugo2 it easily has more than enough power for the HD650. Honestly, I find Chord DACs don’t hide the signature of a headphone even though the typical easy excuse is not enough power.


----------



## Focux (Mar 19, 2019)

x RELIC x said:


> Have you considered different headphones?
> 
> Personally, I find the HD650 veiled. I know, many will say just add the right amp but I never really got along with them. Regarding the Qutest it likely will be better sounding to you but the Atom amp will also add it’s own flavour which might mask some of the differences between the Mojo and the Qutest so there’s that to consider. That’s why I’m thinking different headphones, just as an idea. Of course I’m not debating your Atom amp’s quality or your personal preference,  but just adding an alternative.
> 
> Regarding the Hugo2 it easily has more than enough power for the HD650. Honestly, I find Chord DACs don’t hide the signature of a headphone even though the typical easy excuse is not enough power.



I definitely did consider different headphones and am doing so atm!

Would prefer to spend more on headphones than source as the real world impact seems more substantial?

My list:

Z1R (from reviews, signature appears to be what I like, found a good deal for it as well)
AFO (demo-ed the AFC and really enjoyed it ; needs more low end kick hence the AFO)
LCD 2C (seems to be rivaling the AFO & of exactly the same price where I am)
Utopia (simply because I found a good deal)
Aeolus (“Super HD650, highly recommended by a friend who sold his Clear for it and compliments his LCD X)
800S (sounds v organic but somewhat boring? Shortlisted because of a good deal)

Would be nice if the headphone had decent resale value


----------



## Baten

Focux said:


> My list:
> 
> Z1R (from reviews, signature appears to be what I like, found a good deal for it as well)
> AFO (demo-ed the AFC and really enjoyed it ; needs more low end kick hence the AFO)
> ...



AFO seems like good idea, AFC with more low end thump. Competition with Aeolus...
Aeolus is heavier, Aeon are very lightweight and comfortable.


----------



## x RELIC x

Focux said:


> I definitely did consider different headphones and am doing so atm!
> 
> Would prefer to spend more on headphones than source as the real world impact seems more substantial?
> 
> ...



The path I’ve always taken was as I upgrade my source gear (DAC/amp) I find that I also eventually upgrade my headphones, and vice versa. The HD650 is a classic and it has it’s qualities that many people love but if you’re looking for the biggest upgrade for your tastes then the headphone would be the first thing to consider. Going down the rabbit hole of compensating for a headphone can be tedious and expensive. 

Have you heard any other headphone with the Mojo? If so, how did you like the pairing?

It looks like a wide range of options you’ve got there. I haven’t heard the Z1R but many report big bass from them and a bit V shaped signature. I haven’t heard the AFO but I love the ETHER Flow open and others I trust have said they don’t sound too different (Rob Watts loves AFC with Mojo by the way). I have the LCD-2.2 (2013) but it’s no longer used much as I find the ETHER Flow a much better headphone. I LOVE the Utopia because it has a lot of dynamic punch but it is very forward (I don’t find mine bright though). I haven’t heard or read anything about the Aeolus. I can’t stand the brightness of the HD800S.

But those are my opinions so they’re not really going to apply to your tastes.


----------



## Focux

Baten said:


> AFO seems like good idea, AFC with more low end thump. Competition with Aeolus...
> Aeolus is heavier, Aeon are very lightweight and comfortable.



At 300g+ I was pleasantly surprised with how much nicer they felt on my head than the 650 

As for other models in my list; well there’s no way I can demo any of the above cans apart from a small handful at my local audio store which I do not intend to return due to subpar CS and unattractive pricing 

Read many good things abt Aeolus but hey it costs 1.5 times the price of AFO 

Lifetime warranty for drivers and the artisanal handmade touch is v nice tho


----------



## Focux (Mar 19, 2019)

x RELIC x said:


> The path I’ve always taken was as I upgrade my source gear (DAC/amp) I find that I also eventually upgrade my headphones, and vice versa. The HD650 is a classic and it has it’s qualities that many people love but if you’re looking for the biggest upgrade for your tastes then the headphone would be the first thing to consider. Going down the rabbit hole of compensating for a headphone can be tedious and expensive.
> 
> Have you heard any other headphone with the Mojo? If so, how did you like the pairing?
> 
> ...



I managed to “test” with Mojo:

LCD3
Elear
AFC
MX4
800S
Sundara

All those I benchmarked against 650

To be honest after I bought the Atom, detail retrieval on 650 improved so much that it’s actually on par with AFC (from memory)

If anyone has the 650 and AFC/AFO pls do chime in on that aspect

With the new warranty update from Focal, the Utopia does seem compelling. Even though I found what I tot is a reasonable deal, it’s still the most expensive on the list at abt USD2700

Didn’t know Rob himself loves AFC w Mojo! Always thought he liked the NightHawk since he used that to tune Mojo..??


----------



## x RELIC x

Focux said:


> Didn’t know Rob himself loves AFC w Mojo! Always thought he liked the NightHawk since he used that to tune Mojo..??



The Nighthawk is very smooth with very low distortion, and that’s why I have a pair, but they do come across as dark.



Rob Watts said:


> Mr. Speakers Aeon are exceptionally good; more transparent (much more accurate sound-stage with better depth), and certainly leaner than the Nighthawks, but don't lose out in terms of musicality (which of course is the Nighthawks strength). The Aeons being closed back are excellent in 'planes too, with very good 8 hour comfort.



If the Atom is turning your crank with the HD650 then you may just want to give the Qutest a try anyway. I’m sure others can chime in who have more direct experience. There’s more than just one path and as the old Head Fi saying goes... sorry about your wallet!


----------



## miketlse

Focux said:


> instead of spending a 3k+ on a hugo 2 which kinda would be too weak for 650?



Are you having a laugh?
I use my Hugo 2 to direct drive floorstanding speakers, with no problems.


----------



## nick77

Focux said:


> I managed to “test” with Mojo:
> 
> LCD3
> Elear
> ...



I felt the 650's were horribly veiled, I picked up Wywire Red cable and solved the problem. That 650 cable is definitely a bottleneck!


----------



## Baten

nick77 said:


> I felt the 650's were horribly veiled, I picked up Wywire Red cable and solved the problem. That 650 cable is definitely a bottleneck!


Or simply get periapt/ursine cable and save $300...


----------



## kumar402 (Mar 19, 2019)

Focux said:


> I managed to “test” with Mojo:
> 
> LCD3
> Elear
> ...


If you are in range of $2700, why not try Meze Empyrean. They are easier to drive and will perform well with atom I guess.
I have z1r and it performs well with Mojo and so does Empyrean but Empyrean performs or rather scale better with desktop rig. Once you hear it on desktop rig you may not listen to it directly from Mojo.


----------



## Staxaphone (Mar 19, 2019)

Focux said:


> I definitely did consider different headphones and am doing so atm!
> 
> Would prefer to spend more on headphones than source as the real world impact seems more substantial?
> 
> ...



I have owned the Utopia in my PC-based system for about 3 weeks.  Together with my Qutest - Questyle 600i, I have finally found a system that I feel is equal in sound satisfaction to my main MBPro - DS DAC - Woo GES - Stax009 system.  I have tried many headphones and amp/dac combos.  The Utopia system has the edge in bass impact though equal in low freq extension to 009.  Stax system still has an arier presentation with a tad more pristine nature to upper frquencies that I like.  Biggest difference is that the 009 gives a better out-of-head sound stage, so good with select recordings that it presents the illusion that the orchestra is out in front of me.  On comfort are almost equal although the 009 wide headband can make my head warm with extended wear - never had that yet with the Utopia.

Regarding other headphones on your list that I own/owned or haved tried on long-term "loan" from my son the only near match is the LCD2.  I loved the bass impact on many recordings but could not wear them very long due to excessive head clamping pressure especially when wearing reading glasses.  Tried the LCD3 but same effect.  Until they redesign to be long-term comfortable, Audeze phones are not for me as comfort is paramount in headphone consideration.

In order of decreasing enjoyment (with comfort a major consideration) with my PC system (irrespective of amp/dac config):

Stax 009
Focal Utopia
Beyerdynamics T5P 2nd G
Focal Elear
Sennheiser HD 650
Beyerdynamics DT770 Pro 80 ohm
Grado SR80e
LCD3
LCD2
Sennheiser Momentum 2
Logitech UE6000
Audioquest Nighthawk

The Qutest/600i pairing using PAD Aureus Aqueous ICs is a great sounding combo and might have altered the above sequence had all listening been done with it.


----------



## betula

Staxaphone said:


> I have owned the Utopia in my PC-based system for about 3 weeks.  Together with my Qutest - Questyle 600i, I have finally found a system that I feel is equal in sound satisfaction to my main MBPro - DS DAC - Woo GES - Stax009 system.  I have tried many headphones and amp/dac combos.  The Utopia system has the edge in bass impact though equal in low freq extension to 009.  Stax system still has an arier presentation with a tad more pristine nature to upper frquencies that I like.  Biggest difference is that the 009 gives a better out-of-head sound stage, so good with select recordings that it presents the illusion that the orchestra is out in front of me.  On comfort are almost equal although the 009 wide headband can make my head warm with extended wear - never had that yet with the Utopia.
> 
> Regarding other headphones on your list that I own/owned or haved tried on long-term "loan" from my son the only near match is the LCD2.  I loved the bass impact on many recordings but could not wear them very long due to excessive head clamping pressure especially when wearing reading glasses.  Tried the LCD3 but same effect.  Until they redesign to be long-term comfortable, Audeze phones are not for me as comfort is paramount in headphone consideration.
> 
> ...


I also use a Qutest/CMA600i combo. I can confirm it is a great pairing.


----------



## Focux (Mar 19, 2019)

Let me check out the diff between CMA400i..

Would it matter if I just bought a XLR cable for headphones and plugged it into balanced output on CMA even though my DAC isn’t balanced?

The balanced output is so much more..

Edit: CH650 cable from Sennheiser worth the price..??

Scrap that, I will buy the Periapt cable, berg reasonably priced even after shipping!


----------



## Deftone

Focux said:


> i really did enjoy the 650 much more only after adding the atom
> 
> *previously 650 was so veiled with mojo alone*



650 is supposed to sound "veiled" lol thats its charm sounding warm, romantic, seductive etc...

with more powerful amps in balanced mode the bass becomes a bit tighter and cleaner but also some amps add glare/ sizzle in the treble making 650 appear to have better clarity but it just becomes fatiguing in the long run.


----------



## Deftone

Focux said:


> Let me check out the diff between CMA400i..
> 
> Would it matter if I just bought a XLR cable for headphones and plugged it into balanced output on CMA even though my DAC isn’t balanced?
> 
> ...



There is no need to spend $350 on mywires red, the stock cable is not a bottle neck. You could put that money in to a better transducer.

Do you love the 650 sound signature but want better speed, detail, clarity, imaging ?

.......660S


----------



## Focux

Deftone said:


> There is no need to spend $350 on mywires red, the stock cable is not a bottle neck. You could put that money in to a better transducer.
> 
> *Do you love the 650 sound signature but want better speed, detail, clarity, imaging *?
> 
> .......660S



yes,

i do like the tone of 650 and Aeon Flow, 

better speed, clarity and detail would be a plus for 650

wywires is expensive compared to periapt

do u run your 660S balanced?

i shortlisted CMA400i since it's balanced and has a dac as well (v curious if mojo's dac is better than the one in CMA400i)


----------



## Deftone

Focux said:


> yes,
> 
> i do like the tone of 650 and Aeon Flow,
> 
> ...



No i run 660S single ended straight from Mojo, no amp needed, plenty of power and the same goes for HD800S and Hugo2.

I owned the 650 running balanced out of CMATwelve, it did not come close to 660S and Mojo.


----------



## Focux

Deftone said:


> No i run 660S single ended straight from Mojo, no amp needed, plenty of power and the same goes for HD800S and Hugo2.
> 
> I owned the 650 running balanced out of CMATwelve, it did not come close to 660S and Mojo.



so do u feel balanced adds little improvement if any at all?


----------



## Deftone

Focux said:


> so do u feel balanced adds little improvement if any at all?



To the 650? with the 400i and Twelve yes it did tighten the bass a bit and add some needed speed and precision but nothing close to how much faster the 660S is even single ended direct from Mojo. I wasnt prepared to spend thousands on the 650 even though i do enjoy it.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Took stock of some new toys yesterday. A special run of Black Cat Mini Stargate interconnect by Chris and a set of Audio Replas quartz footers from my recent trip to Tokyo.

I was previously using Black Cat Lupo Mk II and was perfectly happy with it. But the moment I was offered an opportunity to get the Mini Stargate it was a no brainer.
Plugged in the Mini Stargate and quartz footers and allowed the setup to settle before listening. Long story short, I'm quite surprised how well the setup now sounds. Wider and deeper soundstage with lower noise floor. Organic sounding while retaining excellent details. It invites me deeper into the music.

Even more pleasantly surprised how well the Qutest is able to scale. It sounds perfectly good with affordable cabling and the stock power supply, but if you take the effort to match cabling and power supply it rewards you accordingly.
It is nice to still be surprised even after a year of ownership.


----------



## betula

Joe-Siow said:


> Took stock of some new toys yesterday. A special run of Black Cat Mini Stargate interconnect by Chris and a set of Audio Replas quartz footers from my recent trip to Tokyo.
> 
> I was previously using Black Cat Lupo Mk II and was perfectly happy with it. But the moment I was offered an opportunity to get the Mini Stargate it was a no brainer.
> Plugged in the Mini Stargate and quartz footers and allowed the setup to settle before listening. Long story short, I'm quite surprised how well the setup now sounds. Wider and deeper soundstage with lower noise floor. Organic sounding while retaining excellent details. It invites me deeper into the music.
> ...


If this was car tuning, it would be the wildest one.


----------



## betula

I just love what the Qutest does to my headphones.


----------



## Joe-Siow

betula said:


> If this was car tuning, it would be the wildest one.



I know it's quite mad to use interconnects of this price point on the Qutest, but I'm really surprised how much it improved the sound quality compared to the Lupo Mk II I was using earlier.
This just goes to show how much the Qutest have to give and what a gem it is a the current price.

Oh, and the Audio Replas quartz footers work marvelously. I had difficulty hunting for a set of footers since Qutest has such a tiny footprint.


----------



## Nik74

Joe-Siow said:


> Audio Replas quartz footers work marvelously.



What do they help with? I would have thought there s little need for vibration control in a headphone set up


----------



## Staxaphone

nick77 said:


> I am using this one.
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/Micro-USB-5-Pin-Male-To-5-5-x-2-1mm-Female-DC-Power-Converter-Charger-Adapter/182476799414?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649



Follow-up.  I did purchase a micro USB adapter so that I could use my LPS-1 to power my Qutest.  The LPS-1 was only used in the 5V output position.  After extensive listening and comparisons, I find that I prefer the Chord supplied wall wart.  The LPS-1 does tighten up the bass but at the same time it appears more rolled off than with the supplied power supply.  And the response lacks a measure of impact in the lower octaves which results in a less satisfying sound.  The LPS-1 may have been a bit more transparent but I’m not even sure about that since it was so close between the two.  This is, of course, with my headphone system and if I was doing this comparison on an in-room speaker system the results may be different.  Maybe I’ll try the recommended battery power pack for an additional comparison.  For those of you that are using one now, how would you compare the sound and impact in the lower octaves compared to the Chord PS?  Are there differences in this regard between the available battery units when powering the Qutest?  Thanks.


----------



## Joe-Siow (Mar 22, 2019)

Nik74 said:


> What do they help with? I would have thought there s little need for vibration control in a headphone set up



The sound has become more planted. Bass goes a bit deeper. Treble is a bit more open. Background is a bit blacker.
Everything is improved ever so slightly, but they add up to be rather noticeable.
Not bad at all for a tweak that costs around $100.

Edit: I might have to add that I am mostly on a 2 channel speaker setup. I have an AKG K702 but I seldom use it with my Leben CS300XS.


----------



## Roybenz

Im wondering about  getting a qutest for my moon 430had. It has both balanced and unbalanced inputs. Since qutest only have unbalanced, will i get balanced out of my amp when connecting my hp to the 4 pin xlr? Will i loose anything with going unbalanced from qutest compared to using for example balanced from an yggy?


----------



## dac64

Roybenz said:


> Im wondering about  getting a qutest for my moon 430had. It has both balanced and unbalanced inputs. Since qutest only have unbalanced, will i get balanced out of my amp when connecting my hp to the 4 pin xlr? Will i loose anything with going unbalanced from qutest compared to using for example balanced from an yggy?



You amp will convert unbalanced input to balanced output.

My pre a true differentiated design and the qutest works fine.


----------



## Nik74

Joe-Siow said:


> The sound has become more planted. Bass goes a bit deeper. Treble is a bit more open. Background is a bit blacker.
> Everything is improved ever so slightly, but they add up to be rather noticeable.
> Not bad at all for a tweak that costs around $100.
> 
> Edit: I might have to add that I am mostly on a 2 channel speaker setup. I have an AKG K702 but I seldom use it with my Leben CS300XS.


It makes perfect sense in a 2 channel speaker system for sure. Something to think about for when I go that way 
At the moment my Qutest is perched on my Preamp. Did you say you got them in Japan or have I imagined that?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Nik74 said:


> It makes perfect sense in a 2 channel speaker system for sure. Something to think about for when I go that way
> At the moment my Qutest is perched on my Preamp. Did you say you got them in Japan or have I imagined that?



Yup, I got 3 sets of footers while I was at Yobadashi Akihabara earlier this week.
Below is the link of the product from Rakuten. While they do not ship direct to UK, you can get Tenso to ship to you.

https://item.rakuten.co.jp/audiounion/opt1shr3/


----------



## Nik74

Joe-Siow said:


> Yup, I got 3 sets of footers while I was at Yobadashi Akihabara earlier this week.
> Below is the link of the product from Rakuten. While they do not ship direct to UK, you can get Tenso to ship to you.
> 
> https://item.rakuten.co.jp/audiounion/opt1shr3/



I ll be in Tokyo in a few weeks and looking forward to checking out Akihabara, thank you for the info


----------



## Joe-Siow

Nik74 said:


> I ll be in Tokyo in a few weeks and looking forward to checking out Akihabara, thank you for the info



Enjoy Yabadoshi man. I definitely did. So much stuff to look at.


----------



## Windseeker

Nik74 said:


> I ll be in Tokyo in a few weeks and looking forward to checking out Akihabara, thank you for the info



OT/

If you're visiting Akihabara, e-earphone ( https://www.e-earphone.jp/shop-akb/ ) is also awesome

/OT


----------



## Hermitsden

What is electrical noise and how does it affect your DAC?
by John H. Darko
https://darko.audio/2019/03/what-is-electrical-noise-and-how-does-it-affect-your-dac/


----------



## nick77

I hadn't gotten around to trying the different voltage settings till now. I set it to 3v and it works so much better in my system, now I am not going over 12 oclock on my preamp and seems to have more impact. I love the various settings on the Qutest!!


----------



## Roybenz

Anyone know whats best of connecting imac or ipad to the dac?


----------



## soares

If you’re using USB you absolutely need a good end point as an ultraRendu or a SOTM 200 ultra.


----------



## Deftone

Roybenz said:


> *Anyone know whats best of connecting imac *or ipad* to the dac?*



For compatibility - USB

For sound quality - OPT


----------



## OctavianH (Mar 26, 2019)

I have to agree with this. I tried all the inputs and I have to say optical sounds the best for me. I've done also tests by removing all the other inputs and observed no difference from the case all were connected. Anyway I tried a good optical cable with a decent coax and I would say that both sound very close but the optical has a slightly better precision. I know that everyone recommends the coax, but it seems, at least for me, that the optical connection was the best choice.

Cables from the picture below are:

1) Optical - QED Reference Quartz 1m
2) USB - QED Reference USB 3m (PC is under the table)
3) Coax BNC/RCA - Megaptera 1m (https://megapteracables.wixsite.com/megapteracables/digital-cables) - this is a handmade cable
4) Interconnects RCA/RCA - Chord Clearway 1m







PS. Qutest is powered by a linear power supply, USB is filtered with ISO Regen, mains are filtered by a Furman power conditioner and all cables are shielded. Maybe this also helps or at least minimizes the differences between inputs.


----------



## jbarrentine (Mar 26, 2019)

Quartz footers. When magic rocks are sold out. You should plan a vacation to the american midwest and get a shaman to breathe on it too. Extra special magic.

For the life of me I don't understand the people in this hobby sometimes.


----------



## Nik74

jbarrentine said:


> Quartz footers. When magic rocks are sold out. You should plan a vacation to the american midwest and get a shaman to breathe on it too. Extra special magic.
> 
> For the life of me I don't understand the people in this hobby sometimes.



As long as you can accept that your lack of understanding does not in any way invalidate either the choices or the people that make them, each to their own


----------



## jbarrentine

Nik74 said:


> As long as you can accept that your lack of understanding does not in any way invalidate either the choices or the people that make them, each to their own



Liking the way they look would be a valid opinion I could understand, even if I disagreed. Believing they affect sound quality is foolish.


----------



## Joe-Siow

jbarrentine said:


> Believing they affect sound quality is foolish.



Jumping to conclusion before one listens to it actually makes him look more foolish. Hey, whatever rocks your boat.


----------



## jbarrentine

Joe-Siow said:


> Jumping to conclusion before one listens to it actually makes him look more foolish. Hey, whatever rocks your boat.



Yeah, surely I'm the foolish one.


----------



## Joe-Siow

jbarrentine said:


> Yeah, surely I'm the foolish one.



Hmm. Let's see.

Randomly shooting off people with sarcasm over things that he has not tried before - checked
Gets defensive when pointed out that his lack of understanding over the subject matter - checked
Plays victim when pointed out that he still has not actually listen to the effects of the accessories he criticized randomly - checked
Yup, I guess you should be feeling rather foolish now. Moving on then...


----------



## Wildcatsare1

HumanMedia said:


> Primarily they are for the Hugo M Scaler. And let's hope for a cheaper version from Chord and maybe 704/768 kHz input from other devices?



Funny, I just asked Rob if a less expensive version was in the works, unfortunately it’s not in the works, too expensive to manufacture.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Wildcatsare1 said:


> Funny, I just asked Rob if a less expensive version was in the works, unfortunately it’s not in the works, too expensive to manufacture.



That's a real shame. The M Scaler works amazingly well with the Qutest and elevates the sound quality significantly. The price tag though...


----------



## Ilias9001

Joe-Siow said:


> Hmm. Let's see.
> 
> Randomly shooting off people with sarcasm over things that he has not tried before - checked
> Gets defensive when pointed out that his lack of understanding over the subject matter - checked
> ...



I will avoid interfering with the previous conversation but i will say this. When someone provides an opinion about some equipment, it is his own subjective view. But you cannot believe you are right and that is just the way it is just because you said it, especially talking about the alternative upgrade you purchased and not some core item in the chain. I will not come in here saying my house's feng shui impacts my sound output and not expect to get criticized. Unless i have actual arguments or scientific proof...


----------



## Nik74

Actually, sorry but no

It’s an impressions thread and anyone can write what their impression or experience is. Without having to scientifically back that impression because it is a subjective experience. As for the more “esoteric “ system tweaks, whether they are in the realm of placebo or not , well, some of us are into them. If it enhances my experience, if it makes my qutest sound more pleasing, why would I not share it ? Because some people feel it necessary to trash whatever they don’t understand or agree with? 
This hobby is meant to be fun 



Ilias9001 said:


> I will avoid interfering with the previous conversation but i will say this. When someone provides an opinion about some equipment, it is his own subjective view. But you cannot believe you are right and that is just the way it is just because you said it, especially talking about the alternative upgrade you purchased and not some core item in the chain. I will not come in here saying my house's feng shui impacts my sound output and not expect to get criticized. Unless i have actual arguments or scientific proof...


----------



## Ilias9001 (Mar 27, 2019)

Nik74 said:


> If it enhances my experience, if it makes my qutest sound more pleasing, why would I not share it ?


Of course you can share it. But you have to accept people that disagree with you too. I mean, footers on a turntable, yeah maybe. You keep saying people do not understand so they mock. Can you explain what you do unserstand then? Because if not, you are not just making fool of us but also of yourself.


----------



## Nik74

I have heard nothing that needs to be explained or understood, I am merely keeping an open mind towards a tweak that I d like to try myself but haven’t heard yet. 
I m  getting pissed of at the attitude of some people that feel it is ok to mock because they have different views, yours included and I m calling out the behaviour nothing else 
I want to be able to discuss impressions whether I understand the science behind  them or not without having to defent my right to. That’s all I m doing and stopping here .


----------



## Ilias9001

Nik74 said:


> I have heard nothing that needs to be explained or understood, I am merely keeping an open mind towards a tweak that I d like to try myself but haven’t heard yet.
> I m  getting pissed of at the attitude of some people that feel it is ok to mock because they have different views, yours included and I m calling out the behaviour nothing else
> I want to be able to discuss impressions whether I understand the science behind  them or not without having to defent my right to. That’s all I m doing and stopping here .


Do not get me wrong, i believe qutest sounds better than other dacs i have tried but i definitely do not understand the science behind it. 
Keeping an open mind is one thing, believing in magic is another. There is nothing scienc-y about a footer made of quartz. 
Next up: is uranium-235 infused quartz the edge to anti-resonant spikes?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Ilias9001 said:


> Do not get me wrong, i believe qutest sounds better than other dacs i have tried but i definitely do not understand the science behind it.
> Keeping an open mind is one thing, believing in magic is another. There is nothing scienc-y about a footer made of quartz.
> Next up: is uranium-235 infused quartz the edge to anti-resonant spikes?



It is interesting the direction the "discussion" has gone. While we are all agree that the main component ie. Qutest is excellent sounding, there is much sceptism with accessories and expensive footers. 

If you had gone back to see jbarrentine's initial post, it is clear that his post/ mockery was made without having listened to the said accessory and a closed mind. Funny how your post mirrors a case of deja vu. 

Anyway, feel free to mock someone who paid to purchase something and share his impressions for the community. Talk is after all cheap.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Ilias9001 said:


> Keeping an open mind is one thing, believing in magic is another. There is nothing scienc-y about a footer made of quartz.
> Next up: is uranium-235 infused quartz the edge to anti-resonant spikes?


My opinion,too!Where is the science behind those footers?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Zzt231gr said:


> My opinion,too!Where is the science behind those footers?



Feel free to buy a set to try. 

I first got to hear them from a friend who uses them in between his bookshelves and stands.
I do not understand the science behind it but I like what I heard so I opened my wallet for 3 sets for the Qutest and bookshelves.
It is really that simple sometimes. You like it you buy it.


----------



## Zzt231gr (Mar 27, 2019)

Joe-Siow said:


> Feel free to buy a set to try.
> 
> I first got to hear them from a friend who uses them in between his bookshelves and stands.
> I do not understand the science behind it but I like what I heard so I opened my wallet for 3 sets for the Qutest and bookshelves.
> It is really that simple sometimes. You like it you buy it.


I agree.But I think I don't need anyones opinion that mine do work!


----------



## nick77

I wanted to try an isolation product but wasn't willing to spend a lot. Bought some Herbies Tenderfeet Booties for less than $25 and its the best $25 tweak I have ever made!! 
Highly recommend.


----------



## Roybenz

Anyone tried the qutest against the internal dag of the 430had? i wonder how they differ


----------



## T Bone

I'm conducting a bit of an experiment tonight.  I'm comparing my new Chord Qutest to my "old" Holo Spring DAC.  I've got my system configured in such a way (albeit temporarily) to quickly A:B both DAC's on the same amp. 
For this test, I'm using a HeadAmp GS-X mk2 headphone amplifier to drive my Focal Utopia's.  I have my Chord Qutest plugged into my desktop PC via a Curious USB cable.  The Holo Spring is being fed by a Mano Ultra streamer.  I am using ROON to stream the same album track to both DACs.    .....it's not the most scientific setup, but I've gotten some very interesting results to share.

(1) The differences between the Holo Spring and the Qutest aren't as wide as I would have imagined.  The Holo still punches above its weight class.
(2) I find the Qutest gives me better separation.  Listening to the "Jazz at the pawnshop" I found I was able to easily focus on instruments like an upright bass without feeling other instruments "bleeding over"
(3) Although I hate pretentious terms like "micro detail", I felt that the sound of a brush on a snare was more realistic on the Qutest.
(4) Playing a live recording of the Dire Straits (live at the BBC) I actually preferred the Holo.  I got a warmer, richer, thicker, more intimate "live" rock show feeling from the NOS mode of the Holo than I got from the Qutest no matter which filter I tried.  The vocal's were more intimate on the Holo while the crash of the cymbals was more detailed on the Qutest.   

It's rare that I've had an opportunity to A:B two DAC's so closely so it's been an interesting evening.  I'll queue up some more test tracks - perhaps some flamenco guitar, acoustic guitar and acapella vocals to find additional head-to-head comparisons


----------



## Jon L

T Bone said:


> Chord Qutest plugged into my desktop PC via a Curious USB cable.  The Holo Spring is being fed by a Mano Ultra streamer...
> 
> It's rare that I've had an opportunity to A:B two DAC's so closely so it's been an interesting evening.



Isn't it fun though...

Just to play Devil's advocate, the SQ difference between the Mano Ultra Streamer (+which cable?) and your desktop (+USB cable) is likely to be at least as much as the difference between the two DAC's IMHE.  
Quick A-B comparisons can be seductive, but I would put more stock in longer-term A-B comparisons using one source (Mano Ultra) and same connection/cable.  
I do have a Curious USB cable, too, but may I suggest...




BNCrca by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## jbarrentine

Well I'm a believer now. Let me tell you, I tried this a couple different ways, and every other combination sounded terrible. Whatever you do, don't bother with Tylenol, it imparts a horrible screeching to the sound.


----------



## odessamarin

T Bone said:


> I'm conducting a bit of an experiment tonight.  I'm comparing my new Chord Qutest to my "old" Holo Spring DAC.  I've got my system configured in such a way (albeit temporarily) to quickly A:B both DAC's on the same amp.
> For this test, I'm using a HeadAmp GS-X mk2 headphone amplifier to drive my Focal Utopia's.  I have my Chord Qutest plugged into my desktop PC via a Curious USB cable.  The Holo Spring is being fed by a Mano Ultra streamer.  I am using ROON to stream the same album track to both DACs.    .....it's not the most scientific setup, but I've gotten some very interesting results to share.
> 
> (1) The differences between the Holo Spring and the Qutest aren't as wide as I would have imagined.  The Holo still punches above its weight class.
> ...



Very interesting,  thank you.
how would you describe soundstage holography, deeps, size and dimensionality?
I personally found lack of this in qutest.


----------



## Xinlisupreme

Hi Guys,
anyone has compared Qutest with Hugo TT2?


----------



## betula

Xinlisupreme said:


> Hi Guys,
> anyone has compared Qutest with Hugo TT2?


No contest from what I have read and heard. Double amount of taps. Four times more expensive. DAC/amp with supercapacitors vs single DAC. Are you even serious?


----------



## jwbrent

betula said:


> No contest from what I have read and heard. Double amount of taps. Four times more expensive. DAC/amp with supercapacitors vs single DAC. Are you even serious?



I would agree there should be a notable difference between the digital section of the Qutest and TT2, but quantifying that difference with subjective thought may not lead to a slam dunk conclusion for all listeners that the TT2 is worth the additional expense forgoing it’s other capabilities.


----------



## betula

jwbrent said:


> I would agree there should be a notable difference between the digital section of the Qutest and TT2, but quantifying that difference with subjective thought may not lead to a slam dunk conclusion for all listeners that the TT2 is worth the additional expense forgoing it’s other capabilities.


Mea culpa, Sir. I was just reflecting on the fact that we are trying to compare an 'engine' to another 'whole car with a superior engine'. 
Talking about what expense is worth to whom is an extremely subjective topic.


----------



## jwbrent

betula said:


> Mea culpa, Sir. I was just reflecting on the fact that we are trying to compare an 'engine' to another 'whole car with a superior engine'.
> Talking about what expense is worth to whom is an extremely subjective topic.



I wasn’t meaning to criticize your comment, just meaning to say we all have different levels of sensitivity when it comes to evaluating components/transducers and whether any cost difference is worthwhile.


----------



## betula

jwbrent said:


> I wasn’t meaning to criticize your comment, just meaning to say we all have different levels of sensitivity when it comes to evaluating components/transducers and whether any cost difference is worthwhile.


That is true.


----------



## kumar402

Got my Qutest today.
My rig is going to be 
Roon on MBP-> optical Out -> Qutest(Warm filter at 1v) -> Schiit Sys -> Liquid Platinum ( NOS Tubes) -> Empyrean/ HD800S.
Does Qutest need any burn in? I haven’t plugged it in yet.


----------



## kumar402

jbarrentine said:


> Well I'm a believer now. Let me tell you, I tried this a couple different ways, and every other combination sounded terrible. Whatever you do, don't bother with Tylenol, it imparts a horrible screeching to the sound.


Nice stand....I guess it will provide more height to the sound


----------



## kumar402

Don’t we have switch on or off button in Qutest like we had in Mojo? Does it mean we can leave it on all the time? But as per my understanding FPGA based DAC gets hot hence must be switched off when not in use, Is my understanding correct?


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

kumar402 said:


> Don’t we have switch on or off button in Qutest like we had in Mojo? Does it mean we can leave it on all the time? But as per my understanding FPGA based DAC gets hot hence must be switched off when not in use, Is my understanding correct?


You can leave the Qutest on at all times. It doesn't get hot, I'd say lukewarm more or less.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

kumar402 said:


> Got my Qutest today.
> My rig is going to be
> Roon on MBP-> optical Out -> Qutest(Warm filter at 1v) -> Schiit Sys -> Liquid Platinum ( NOS Tubes) -> Empyrean/ HD800S.
> Does Qutest need any burn in? I haven’t plugged it in yet.


Tube amp, additional SYS in the signal path and "warm" filter? Strange choice.


----------



## Meanstreak242

kumar402 said:


> Got my Qutest today.
> My rig is going to be
> Roon on MBP-> optical Out -> Qutest(Warm filter at 1v) -> Schiit Sys -> Liquid Platinum ( NOS Tubes) -> Empyrean/ HD800S.
> Does Qutest need any burn in? I haven’t plugged it in yet.



My Qutest definitely required a burn-in.   The mids were quite bright bordering on glaring when I first plugged it in.  I left it on with music playing for a couple of days via USB, and when I came back the brightness was completely gone.  Now the DAC just sounds beautiful (to my ears.) 

But with all the differences between systems, ears, and taste your mileage may vary.


----------



## Staxaphone

Meanstreak242 said:


> My Qutest definitely required a burn-in.   The mids were quite bright bordering on glaring when I first plugged it in.  I left it on with music playing for a couple of days via USB, and when I came back the brightness was completely gone.  Now the DAC just sounds beautiful (to my ears.)
> 
> But with all the differences between systems, ears, and taste your mileage may vary.



My experience also for about the first 8 hours of play, but more so in the upper mids.  Beautiful sounding is an apt description now.


----------



## kumar402

Ragnar-BY said:


> Tube amp, additional SYS in the signal path and "warm" filter? Strange choice.


have removed SYS. Had to use SYS earlier with LP as the amp doesn't have a gain switch. However I found with 1v input  Ican get away from sys.
I am little treble sensitive and like Warm sound and thats why I have Z1R and Empyrean. 800s only gets headtime for critical listening or some genre suited for it.I am ok to loose out on details as long as I get treble just right.
Ya it sounds strange.


----------



## Triode User

kumar402 said:


> Does Qutest need any burn in? I haven’t plugged it in yet.



Ask some people and they will say yes. I personally feel it is brain/ear burn in they have experienced and that it is unlikely that a piece of kit such as the Qutest will vary with burn in. For instance I heard a 2 year old Dave and a brand new one straight out of the box and they were identical.


----------



## Windseeker

Triode User said:


> Ask some people and they will say yes. I personally feel it is brain/ear burn in they have experienced and that it is unlikely that a piece of kit such as the Qutest will vary with burn in. For instance I heard a 2 year old Dave and a brand new one straight out of the box and they were identical.



+1 this. 

But I experienced "brain burn-in" anyways, so ...


----------



## Staxaphone

Just used the Qutest for first time as the front end dac for my Woo GES/Stax 009.  Great synergy this combo.  The transparency and drive of  Qutest mate well with the tubed Woo and the electrostats,  Sounds more enjoyable than with my PS Audio DS DAC.  That was a tad too warm for the full emotional excitement to come thru unscathed.  Anyone else using the 009 with the Qutest?


----------



## Windseeker

Staxaphone said:


> Just used the Qutest for first time as the front end dac for my Woo GES/Stax 009.  Great synergy this combo. ...(snip snip) ...  Anyone else using the 009 with the Qutest?



I do, and definitely agree that there's a great synergy.  Transparent, highly musical, and utterly non-fatiguing.  On weekends, I can listen continuously for hours.


----------



## Staxaphone

Windseeker said:


> I do, and definitely agree that there's a great synergy.  Transparent, highly musical, and utterly non-fatiguing.  On weekends, I can listen continuously for hours.



What HP amp are you using with your 009?


----------



## Windseeker

Staxaphone said:


> What HP amp are you using with your 009?



I use Accuphase C-2150 as a pre-amp,  and SRM-727 II with volume bypass ("direct switch") activated -- which means SRM-727 II is only used as a energizer.


----------



## Staxaphone

Windseeker said:


> I use Accuphase C-2150 as a pre-amp,  and SRM-727 II with volume bypass ("direct switch") activated -- which means SRM-727 II is only used as a energizer.



Thanks.  I've never tried a solid state amp with them although I came close to buying one of Mjölnir-Audio's KGSSHV Carbon but could never pull the trigger since i always love the GES every time I listen.  Maybe someday just out of curiosity.


----------



## Windseeker

Staxaphone said:


> Thanks.  I've never tried a solid state amp with them although I came close to buying one of Mjölnir-Audio's KGSSHV Carbon but could never pull the trigger since i always love the GES every time I listen.



I've been a STAX user for a little over three decades (Lambda Signature, Omega 2, and then 009) and had been using tube amps (alongside solid states) for the last twenty years.  So, yes, I can definitely relate to how you feel.

In fact, I decided to go pure SS only after acquiring Chord Qutest (and M Scaler later) last year.  Of course, I absolutely don't mean to say that Chord DACs don't pair well with tube amps.  It just that I'd become more interested in maximizing transparency & avoiding colorization to the extent possible. ... At least for now


----------



## Staxaphone

Windseeker said:


> I've been a STAX user for a little over three decades (Lambda Signature, Omega 2, and then 009) and had been using tube amps (alongside solid states) for the last twenty years.  So, yes, I can definitely relate to how you feel.
> 
> In fact, I decided to go pure SS only after acquiring Chord Qutest (and M Scaler later) last year.  Of course, I absolutely don't mean to say that Chord DACs don't pair well with tube amps.  It just that I'd become more interested in maximizing transparency & avoiding colorization to the extent possible. ... At least for now



I'd like to the add the M Scaler eventually.  Did you listen with the Qutest for a while before adding the M Scaler?  Curious if its addition would be merely a subtle improvement or more of a quantum leap when heard through the highly resolving Stax.


----------



## Eylrik

Hi,

I’ve got a slight issue when I connect my 2qute to the my Kef LS50 wireless speakers, using the 2qute as a dac.
My source is an Aries Mini hence connected via usb to the 2qute then linked to the auxiliary rca input of the Kef ls50 wireless.
My problem is that for a few songs only, the music saturates. This is annoying even though it happens only with a few songs (also not hi-res files) but mostly noticeable on voices.
Could it be that the high output voltage of the 2qute might cause some issue with the rca sensitivity of my Kef LS50 wireless?

Thanks for your help and thinking here !


----------



## betula

Zeos has reviewed the Qutest. He said he can't hear any difference between the Qutest and his £200 DAC. Lucky man. Can save a lot of cash.


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

betula said:


> Zeos has reviewed the Qutest. He said he can't hear any difference between the Qutest and his £200 DAC. Lucky man. Can save a lot of cash.


I'm sure we all wish we were that lucky... I disagree with a lot of things he said in that video. But everyone, including Zeos, is entitled to their opinion. Still get a kick out of the dumb things he says sometimes, top notch entertainment.


----------



## kumar402

betula said:


> Zeos has reviewed the Qutest. He said he can't hear any difference between the Qutest and his £200 DAC. Lucky man. Can save a lot of cash.


That's why not everyone can be a reviewer.
I seriously think it requires long listening session to compare a DAC. Quick A/B never helps. If you give long playing time to DAC you will invariably come across passage in song where a DAC may perform better then another.
I can clearly hear better details in Qutest as compared to Mojo when I was listening non stop thru it yesterday. I am using same headphone Zeos was using, Empyrean.Who knows if I start doing  A/B to compare I will miss those things that separates it from other DAC. An audio equipment reviewer should be well versed with the details to look for in a song and how it was presented thru a DAC in a listening session.Just playing random song and saying I can't hear a difference doesnt make someone a good reviewer.
I got SMSL SU 8 based on his review and review in some other website but when I heard it, I could easily make out it was thin sounding. But when I started doing A/B I was struggling to find a difference but if I hear songs thru that DAC for long time I could feel the Body and soul was missing. That's when I realized A/B ing is no good for me.


----------



## kumar402

I feel a reviewer must present example from passage of songs where he felt DAC provided more details, better layering, separation etc. Even I can create a  video saying lot of things. Doing A/B and saying I don't find any difference.


----------



## Nik74

Nautrachkfriend said:


> I'm sure we all wish we were that lucky... I disagree with a lot of things he said in that video. But everyone, including Zeos, is entitled to their opinion. Still get a kick out of the dumb things he says sometimes, top notch entertainment.



Of similar entertainment value are the comments on that review. They make head fi feel like a parallel universe


----------



## kumar402

I wish he could have used few more DACs to see if he can tell any difference among anyone


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

Nik74 said:


> Of similar entertainment value are the comments on that review. They make head fi feel like a parallel universe


People love to hate on what they don't understand or can't have. That's what I got out of those comments.

At the end of the day I'm quite satisfied with my Qutest and I _can_ tell a difference between it any many other dacs that I've tried.


----------



## Staxaphone

Too bad all reviewers (and even forum posters like us!) aren't required to have a graph from a standardized hearing test posted with every review (or post - like a little sticky).  So for the moment forget about all the problems in determining if posted hearing test results are actual, fabricated or messaged.  Assume they are all factual.  The result would be many reviewers out of a job.  And most remaining reviewers would tend be younger with better hearing, but maybe lacking in listening experience (and wisdom).  My point is: how can you believe what any reviewer says unless you know, first and foremost, what his hearing ability actually is?  All other characteristics are secondary to that in my opinion.


----------



## kumar402

Staxaphone said:


> Too bad all reviewers (and even forum posters like us!) aren't required to have a graph from a standardized hearing test posted with every review (or post - like a little sticky).  So for the moment forget about all the problems in determining if posted hearing test results are actual, fabricated or messaged.  Assume they are all factual.  The result would be many reviewers out of a job.  And most remaining reviewers would tend be younger with better hearing, but maybe lacking in listening experience (and wisdom).  My point is: how can you believe what any reviewer says unless you know, first and foremost, what his hearing ability actually is?  All other characteristics are secondary to that in my opinion.


Exactly my point they have to substantiate their verdict with material like what song they heard and how DAC1 and DAC2 performed in a passage of song. A listener can go back to the same song and see for himself as to what the reviewer said makes sense for him or not.


----------



## Windseeker

Staxaphone said:


> I'd like to the add the M Scaler eventually.  Did you listen with the Qutest for a while before adding the M Scaler?  Curious if its addition would be merely a subtle improvement or more of a quantum leap when heard through the highly resolving Stax.



Yes, I'd used Qutest for a month before adding M Scaler to my audio chain.  I decided to go ahead and add it precisely because I was extremely impressed with Qutest, and hence, with Rob Watts' approach to conversion of digital signal to analog music.

Concerning M Scaler's impact, the difference is subtle, for sure. However, to my ears, the difference in musicality -- improved naturalness, believability, intimacy -- is clear and non-trivial.   I certainly wouldn't want to go back to a world without it.  By the way, one arguably needs a reasonably revealing system to be able to enjoy its benefits, and I guess using high-end STAX earspeakers definitely helps in that regard. 

Anyways, it isn't exactly cheap, so you may wanto ask around at M Scaler's thread (over at High-End Audio Forum) and eventually audition it extensively yourself.   At the end of the day, only your ears (and brain) can dictate whether it's worth the investment.


----------



## gwertheim (Mar 30, 2019)

What I liked about the review is he had it hooked up in a way where you didn't need to swap out cables or anything.

He had both DAC's receiving the exact same music file from the same computer, the exact same optical signal, using the same rca cables to the same thx 789 amp going to the exact same headphones.

I am no expert, according to my last hearing test 2 months ago, my hearing is above average for a 35 year old.

What I do know is that he eliminated any major margin for error by using the setup he has. I doubt anybody on here would bother going through that much effort to do an A/B test. His testing methodology is as close to perfect we could expect from someone outside of a lab environment.

I will never be able to afford a Chord product, but crap, if I can get something comparable for $200, why not. I am in this for the enjoyment of music, not to look at numbers and charts. As long as it sounds good, I don't care. 

At least the guy is honest and transparent with his opinions and how he does things.


----------



## Spareribs

The Chord DAC is not for everybody. It's for the 1% people out there with the gifted sense of hearing that can hear the sound of splitting hairs.


----------



## Deftone

betula said:


> Zeos has reviewed the Qutest. He said he can't hear any difference between the Qutest and his £200 DAC. Lucky man. Can save a lot of cash.



Hes not a lucky man he's a moron, he doesnt know how to do a decent review so he tries to make up for it with quirky comments and jokes. In a video i watched a few years back he said all dacs over $100 sound the same, so why does he keep reviewing the high end equipment if he cant hear it. He does next to no research on what hes "reviewing" and just has a quick glance at their website for a bit of information. 

He shows at the start of the video he doesn't care about the design of the dac or the designer and where does he explain about the reason for not needing balanced output? he doesnt and thats why tons of people in the comments are saying its over priced crap because some $100 dacs have it. Calls out bullschiit on things he doesn't understand, complains about $1900 dac with chinese power supply, further proof he does zero research about the technology and the power filtering going inside the Qutest.

To top it all off he tries to give other reviewers advice, the ones that can run rings around his entire channel in under 40 seconds. Its not just about Chord its about almost everything he gets his hands on and thinks repeating screw screw screw is a good enough description of sound quality (when he likes something)

Rant over/


----------



## kumar402 (Mar 30, 2019)

Well I did my own A/B between Chord Mojo and Qutest.
In fact I didn’t even use LP and Empyrean or 800s. I used Schiit Valhalla 2 with JJ gold Pin with HD600 with Dekoni pads. it is the most humble yet very good sounding pair.
I used MacBook Pro late 2013 and connected Mojo via optical out and Chord Quetest Via USB out. Output of both DAC going into Schiit Sys, NO ATTENUATION, for switching. In Roon I created a zone for both the DAC so that same song can be played in both the DAC and I can do A/B with click of a button in SYS. Both are running at ~2v
I played the first song and I could definitely hear difference between Mojo and Qutest.
In the first listen itself it is clear that Mojo is warmer sounding of 2 and quetest has more air and hence  more detail and separation in instrument. Definitely qutest provide more depth and is far more resolving compared to Mojo.Anyone looking to get every details extracted from music should look for Qutest.
I am not sure how can someone not find a difference among DAC. I don’t have the Gashelli Lab dac but I wanted to check if the difference between DAC can be heard easily and yes it can be. Definitely among Mojo and Qutest.
Also I find Qutest to have better extension in Bass as well as treble. But since Mojo doesn’t have great extension in Treble so it sounds warmer compared to Qutest.


----------



## domho7

kumar402 said:


> Well I did my own A/B between Chord Mojo and Qutest.
> In fact I didn’t even use LP and Empyrean or 800s. I used Schiit Valhalla 2 with JJ gold Pin with HD600 with Dekoni pads. it is the most humble yet very good sounding pair.
> I used MacBook Pro late 2013 and connected Mojo via optical out and Chord Quetest Via USB out. Output of both DAC going into Schiit Sys, NO ATTENUATION, for switching. In Roon I created a zone for both the DAC so that same song can be played in both the DAC and I can do A/B with click of a button in SYS. Both are running at ~2v
> I played the first song and I could definitely hear difference between Mojo and Qutest.
> ...


Tks for your explanation. That's. How I felt when I hv the mojo & compared qutest..
The qutest simply brings out more details that I didn't hear in my mojo


----------



## Christer

Staxaphone said:


> I'd like to the add the M Scaler eventually.  Did you listen with the Qutest for a while before adding the M Scaler?  Curious if its addition would be merely a subtle improvement or more of a quantum leap when heard through the highly resolving Stax.




I would say that with any good headphone it is a Quantum Leap!!

I bought my Qutest only after having heard it not only on its own, but also via BLU2 and with the knowledge that an M Scaler was around the corner.
I bought the Qutest primarily to pair it with an M Scaler.

Without an M Scaler Qutest is  one of several good dacs in its price range imho.

I am using Q/HMS with my HD800 during my travels and would find it very difficult to live without the M Scaler.
With a high quality headphone amp and the HD800 the benefit of HMS is immediately obvious with well recorded acoustic music. 

Cheers Controversial Christer


----------



## Wildcatsare1

betula said:


> Zeos has reviewed the Qutest. He said he can't hear any difference between the Qutest and his £200 DAC. Lucky man. Can save a lot of cash.



Only one problem with that, Zeos is a complete idiot.


----------



## alxw0w

Deftone said:


> Hes not a lucky man he's a moron, he doesnt know how to do a decent review so he tries to make up for it with quirky comments and jokes. In a video i watched a few years back he said all dacs over $100 sound the same, so why does he keep reviewing the high end equipment if he cant hear it. He does next to no research on what hes "reviewing" and just has a quick glance at their website for a bit of information.
> 
> He shows at the start of the video he doesn't care about the design of the dac or the designer and where does he explain about the reason for not needing balanced output? he doesnt and thats why tons of people in the comments are saying its over priced crap because some $100 dacs have it. Calls out bullschiit on things he doesn't understand, complains about $1900 dac with chinese power supply, further proof he does zero research about the technology and the power filtering going inside the Qutest.
> 
> ...



Exactly he is deaf or paid to promote china cheap stuff. Wana impress zeos ? Send him cheap dac with over blown bass section - bam done . 
Just no words


----------



## domho7

Should I go for qutest or Hugo2.


----------



## betula

Wildcatsare1 said:


> Only one problem with that, Zeos is a complete idiot.


I don't hate the man, but also don't consider him a 'proper' reviewer. He is somewhere between stand up comedy and audio reviews. For that I quite like him and I do think he is saying his honest opinion.
The problem is his hearing definitely has limitations which is fine, all of our hearing has limits. Some can't hear a difference between DACs, some can't hear a difference between Qutest filters. Rob's hearing is probably as good as it gets for human beings and better than most of ours.

What the real problem with Zeos is, that several thousands of people listen to him and follow him which brings a responsibility of what one can say, even though it is his honest opinion which he is entitled to. 

To me Qutest opened another world after Mojo and the 2Qute. The difference was immediate and obvious, there was no going back. The spaciousness, clarity, detail, resolution, soundstage depth speed, extension, naturalness all dramatically improved. I consider Qutest to be my best audio purchase in 2018 (I didn't pay full retail price though).


----------



## Arniesb (Mar 31, 2019)

gwertheim said:


> What I liked about the review is he had it hooked up in a way where you didn't need to swap out cables or anything.
> 
> He had both DAC's receiving the exact same music file from the same computer, the exact same optical signal, using the same rca cables to the same thx 789 amp going to the exact same headphones.
> 
> ...


Humans are not perfect and its hard to hear big difference in quick swaps. Much better is to listen gear week or more and then comeback to lesser gear and it will be easy to notice what is missing.


----------



## Focux

Christer said:


> I would say that with any good headphone it is a Quantum Leap!!
> 
> I bought my Qutest only after having heard it not only on its own, but also via BLU2 and with the knowledge that an M Scaler was around the corner.
> I bought the Qutest primarily to pair it with an M Scaler.
> ...



any chance might there be a more economical alternative? 

preferably not chi-fi type*


----------



## Joe-Siow

Focux said:


> any chance might there be a more economical alternative?
> 
> preferably not chi-fi type*



I heard the Singxer SU-6 on my friend's speaker setup. I like what I heard. Pretty good upscale for a fraction of the price.


----------



## tesarpa (Mar 31, 2019)

kumar402 said:


> Well I did my own A/B between Chord Mojo and Qutest.
> In fact I didn’t even use LP and Empyrean or 800s. I used Schiit Valhalla 2 with JJ gold Pin with HD600 with Dekoni pads. it is the most humble yet very good sounding pair.
> I used MacBook Pro late 2013 and connected Mojo via optical out and Chord Quetest Via USB out. Output of both DAC going into Schiit Sys, NO ATTENUATION, for switching. In Roon I created a zone for both the DAC so that same song can be played in both the DAC and I can do A/B with click of a button in SYS. Both are running at ~2v
> I played the first song and I could definitely hear difference between Mojo and Qutest.
> ...


Thank you for sharing your test results. Let me suggest to make cross test to exclude impact of interfaces and cables. Could you repeat it while Mojo on USB and Qutest on optical? I had a strange experience once, when I tried A/B of two DACs and finally found out that biggest differences were in RCA cables, which I unfortunately did not have same.


----------



## gwertheim

Arniesb said:


> Humans are not perfect and its hard to hear big difference in quick swaps. Much better is to listen gear week or more and then comeback to lesser gear and it will be easy to notice what is missing.



Actually for me quick changes are better. I used to do sound editing and I have trained my ears to pick out subtle changes in EQ. 

We are all human and have different range in hearing and training. You might not agree with me but that's what makes us unique.


----------



## betula

gwertheim said:


> Actually for me quick changes are better. I used to do sound editing and I have trained my ears to pick out subtle changes in EQ.
> 
> We are all human and have different range in hearing and training. You might not agree with me but that's what makes us unique.


Both quick changes and long term listening are necessary for a profound and fair evaluation. Quick changes reveal the obvious differences, but can often be misleading as our brain usually needs 5-15 minutes to fully adapt to a new sound. Also, lot of the more subtle sound characteristics won't pop up just after a few days with living with the new gear. Focal Clear for example impressed me at first quite a bit but after a few days I just couldn't live with it.


----------



## Spareribs

Maybe zeos couldn’t tell the difference because he was distracted by the cartoon anime girls


----------



## Wildcatsare1 (Mar 31, 2019)

betula said:


> I don't hate the man, but also don't consider him a 'proper' reviewer. He is somewhere between missing ut on great equipment l or buying  stand up comedy and audio reviews. For that I quite like him and I do think he is saying his honest opinion.
> The problem is his hearing definitely has limitations which is fine, all of our hearing has limits. Some can't hear a difference between DACs, some can't hear a difference between Qutest filters. Rob's hearing is probably as good as it gets for human beings and better than most of ours.
> 
> What the real problem with Zeos is, that several thousands of people listen to him and follow him which brings a responsibility of what one can say, even though it is his honest opinion which he is entitled to.
> ...




My problem with Zeos is a) he’s not a “proper” reviewer, but he states his opinions as unequal truth, b) many in those 1,000 or so listeners take his reviews seriously, c) this can be an expensive hobby, misleading people into buying gear, or not buying, carries responsibilities. Those “followers” who take him seriously end up missing out on great equipment, while being pushed into buying cheap Chinafi. He hasn’t reached the peak of NWAVGuy, but is cut from the same horribly misleading audio fool profile.


----------



## Baten

Wildcatsare1 said:


> Those “followers” who take him seriously end up missing out on great equipment, while being pushed into buying cheap Chinafi. He hasn’t reached the peak of NWAVGuy, but is cut from the same horribly misleading audio fool profit.



Honestly the price difference should not dictate the sound quality difference, if cheap gear gets you most of the way there (and that can really be the case depending on what you buy!) we should not be cheap- shaming people either.. let's not get too snobby/elitist


----------



## Wildcatsare1

Baten said:


> Honestly the price difference should not dictate the sound quality difference, if cheap gear gets you most of the way there (and that can really be the case depending on what you buy!) we should not be cheap- shaming people either.. let's not get too snobby/elitist



Not my point, Zeos leading his followers to buy bad equipment, no matter the cost, due his poorly formed, and informed, opinions.


----------



## Baten (Mar 31, 2019)

Wildcatsare1 said:


> Not my point, Zeos leading his followers to buy bad equipment, no matter the cost, due his poorly formed, and informed, opinions.


OK, bad equipment, any examples? The Qutest review he kept comparing with the Geshelli which is a pretty decent/above average DAC and cheap. It is still an understandable statement that he personally would not buy something 9.5x its price.

I for one don't understand the saltiness these past pages. Do you really need the enforcement of reviewers to feel better about your purchase of the qutest? Can't he personally not find it worth it?


----------



## bikutoru

Baten said:


> OK, bad equipment, any examples? The Qutest review he kept comparing with the Geshelli which is a pretty decent/above average DAC and cheap. It is still an understandable statement that he personally would not buy something 9.5x its price.
> 
> I for one don't understand the saltiness these past pages. Do you really need the enforcement of reviewers to feel better about your purchase of the qutest? Can't he personally not find it worth it?



I do agree with Baten.
Since Wildcatsare1 mentioned the NWAVGuy.
During that time lots of people that charged big buck for their dacs were very upset that somebody could create something decent and affordable.
I do have the original ODAC and grateful to him for creating it, as at that time I couldn't afford anything north off $200. Still listen to it at least once weekly, it is no Chord dac but is very decent what it is and JDSLabs supports it way better than Chord supported Mojo.


----------



## Wildcatsare1

Baten said:


> OK, bad equipment, any examples? The Qutest review he kept comparing with the Geshelli which is a pretty decent/above average DAC and cheap. It is still an understandable statement that he personally would not buy something 9.5x its price.
> 
> I for one don't understand the saltiness these past pages. Do you really need the enforcement of reviewers to feel better about your purchase of the qutest? Can't he personally not find it worth it?



Don’t even have a Qutest, just been around long enough to be able to identify a fraud when I see one. What’s the context in which the Geshelli an above average DAC, in comparison to what, to Chord, Schiit, Benchmark, or other ChFi gear? 

My issues with Zeos aren’t about cost of gear, but more on the context of reviewing gear inappropriately or improperly, then spouting off opinions on that gear. If he wants to be taken seriously, he needs to take the time to learn about the subject, simple things like when and how to use tube gear, synergy matching headphones, amps, DACs, cabeling. Not just spouting off, on a subject he obviously knows very little about, with zero depth. It’s not about how many participation trophies he’s been given, or breathless reviews from his Mommy. It’s about working hard to be informed on the subject of your study.


----------



## Wildcatsare1

bikutoru said:


> I do agree with Baten.
> Since Wildcatsare1 mentioned the NWAVGuy.
> During that time lots of people that charged big buck for their dacs were very upset that somebody could create something decent and affordable.
> I do have the original ODAC and grateful to him for creating it, as at that time I couldn't afford anything north off $200. Still listen to it at least once weekly, it is no Chord dac but is very decent what it is and JDSLabs supports it way better than Chord supported Mojo.



NWAVGuy is rolling over in his grave, in his mind all you needed was his ”genius” work, nothing more. I will thank him for one thing though, he did demonstrate that even if the measurements of amps or DACs are off the charts good, they can still sound like Schiit.


----------



## dac64

Maybe Mr. Zeos should acquire this to compare with his $200 dac, https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/c6db56_f52e72d4330b451c8c5bbe6724e9ec27.pdf, and see what he youtubing!


----------



## Gibson59

Zeos can certainly be entertaining (and equally annoying) but I would never buy something based on his “review”. I can only watch for a little while before his shtick gets old. I couldn’t agree more with @Wildcatsare1 that he’s got very little credibility in his approach. I’ve only been into this hobby for a couple years and it’s readily apparent to me.


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> Zeos can certainly be entertaining (and equally annoying) but I would never buy something based on his “review”. I can only watch for a little while before his shtick gets old. I couldn’t agree more with @Wildcatsare1 that he’s got very little credibility in his approach. I’ve only been into this hobby for a couple years and it’s readily apparent to me.


Its hard to trust anyone when lot of reviews are bought or almost anyone fanboying over certain brand or just simply do quick swaps or listen few hours on meet and make reviews.


----------



## turbomustang84

Anyone basing a purchase on any YouTube Review is making a mistake .

Although I don't claim to know everything but I've been into the high end audio hobbie well before most of these YouTube reviewer's were born ,so I watch reviewer's like Zeos because he makes me laugh .

I do look at reviews of verified purchasers on Amazon which is mostly for build quality and durability and those are what made me shy away from the only Chord purchase I actually was considering the Mojo .

There are a bunch of purchasers that  had their mojo quit working ,
so that being the  most talked about chord product  I am unlikely to buy the Qutest unless I can find evidence that it will be better than the mojo .

Because paid reviewer's will not sway me but people that actually bought an item only to have it fail in a short time will .

I do own the Geshelli Enog2 Dac ,anyone own both the Geshelli and the Qutest ?


----------



## betula

turbomustang84 said:


> Anyone basing a purchase on any YouTube Review is making a mistake .
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


That's a big truth. The problem is youtube reviewers and 'influencers' have become nowdays half gods. A lot of inexperienced people follow them blindly and think they speak THE truth. They forget that's just one persons opinion even if it has 10K+views. 

I also try to find every available information before purchase and then try to audition which isn't always possible. By now I have come to a state where I don't believe anyone. All the information can only give you a very vague idea how something might sound. The only real test and review is your own ears.

Regarding Mojo I wouldn't worry. It is one of the most successful portable DAC/amp ever made. Chord sold 60.000+ it is inevitable you will read about problems (mostly battery). The happy 59.867 Mojo owners won't post as much as the unhappy 133. And even for them Chord has most likely solved the issue. (I was one of them, got a replacement immediately.)

Chord products are one of the best built products I have come across. My Qutest is like a solid brick, you could use it as a lethal weapon and it would keep working. Also, there isn't much in it that can go wrong... No moving parts, no battery. 
Don't shy away from this (IMO) revolutionary sound because of a few Mojo battery failures (which often can be the user's fault).


----------



## turbomustang84

betula said:


> That's a big truth. The problem is youtube reviewers and 'influencers' have become nowdays half gods. A lot of inexperienced people follow them blindly and think they speak THE truth. They forget that's just one persons opinion even if it has 10K+views.
> 
> I also try to find every available information before purchase and then try to audition which isn't always possible. By now I have come to a state where I don't believe anyone. All the information can only give you a very vague idea how something might sound. The only real test and review is your own ears.
> 
> ...


Chord has been around a long time and although ive never purchased any of their products they have a fantastic reputation .

But as far as home Amplifiers go I am kind of a  a Nelson Pass fan boy so I've got that end of my system covered. 

But I really would like to have a hands on listen to the Qutest to see how it compares to what I already have tried but it has a price that it would have to be considerably better than my Geshelli Enog2 which is awfully good in my opinion but from a design perspective the Qutest is in a different league .

But now i might take another look at the Mojo because I need a portable just wish it was balanced


----------



## betula

turbomustang84 said:


> Chord has been around a long time and although ive never purchased any of their products they have a fantastic reputation .
> 
> But as far as home Amplifiers go I am kind of a  a Nelson Pass fan boy so I've got that end of my system covered.
> 
> ...


These days there is too much to read about balanced/single ended. It is because more and more people are getting into this hobby and on less-expensive gear (below £/$1000) balanced has obvious advantages vs. SE. More power will almost always sound better: more space, better separation, enhanced tightness. It is easy to achieve this on lower-end gear. 
When you move to higher-end gear balanced or SE output become meaningless. Implementation is all that matters. Hugo TT2 has SE out only as default (yes, I know it can output balanced at the back) but that SE out humiliates most of the balanced amps under £3000.


----------



## Roybenz

Sage Encore said:


> Hi Guys,
> Sorry if I am asking in the wrong thread, can any kind souls please help. My current setup is: Amp: Simaudio HAD 430 (DAC model), Source is SP 1000, I also have a ALO CDM. Should I invest in a Qutest since I basically have three different DACs ie, My amp has a ESS Sabre 32bit 9018, my source SP1000 has dual AKM chips think its AK 4497EQ which I can use as a DAC and my ALO CDM has Wolfson DAC on board which I can also use as a DAC using Line out.
> 
> Will I see a significant increase in sound reproduction to all of the above combos I have in hand or should I just invest in something else. Thank you for your times guys.



Hi did you go for the qutest? Was it better than the one in 430had?


----------



## betula

Qutest might be expensive, especially in the US. (Same way US products like Headpamp are more expensive in Europe.)
I bought my Qutest brand new for £1000/$1300: I am done with DAC purchases for many years. Until I can afford TT2 which will be a good 2-3 years I guess.
Having the best possible DAC under $2000 gives me the freedom to experiment with the best amps I can afford. 
The amp can only amplify the signal it gets from the DAC. IMO quality of DACs are underestimated in this hobby.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> Qutest might be expensive, especially in the US. (Same way US products like Headpamp are more expensive in Europe.)
> I bought my Qutest brand new for £1000/$1300: I am done with DAC purchases for many years. Until I can afford TT2 which will be a good 2-3 years I guess.
> Having the best possible DAC under $2000 gives me the freedom to experiment with the best amps I can afford.
> The amp can only amplify the signal it gets from the DAC. IMO quality of DACs are underestimated in this hobby.


I would say amp 65 and dac 35 percent importantce for me. With great amp and average dac music can still sound great, but good dac wont add dynamics, drive, punch and kick like amp do. I dont think dac can make or break headphone, but certainly help to reveal even more potential.


----------



## Deftone

betula said:


> Qutest might be expensive, especially in the US. (Same way US products like Headpamp are more expensive in Europe.)
> I bought my Qutest brand new for £1000/$1300: I am done with DAC purchases for many years. Until I can afford TT2 which will be a good 2-3 years I guess.
> Having the best possible DAC under $2000 gives me the freedom to experiment with the best amps I can afford.
> The amp can only amplify the signal it gets from the DAC. IMO quality of DACs are underestimated in this hobby.



It seems that everyone wants a TT2, including me lol.


----------



## DMax99

Hi all, 

I already love the sound of my Qutest heaps. Will the M Scaler take it to the next level? Is it worth the $$$ investment since it's much more $$$ than the Qutest?

Cheers


----------



## Macaron (Apr 4, 2019)

betula said:


> Qutest might be expensive, especially in the US. (Same way US products like Headpamp are more expensive in Europe.)
> I bought my Qutest brand new for £1000/$1300: I am done with DAC purchases for many years. Until I can afford TT2 which will be a good 2-3 years I guess.
> Having the best possible DAC under $2000 gives me the freedom to experiment with the best amps I can afford.
> The amp can only amplify the signal it gets from the DAC. IMO quality of DACs are underestimated in this hobby.



I fully agree, Linn always said "source first" and I completely agree after having invested into the source here.
The amplifier nor the speakers/headphone can reproduce something they never received 
The source is the foundation of the system.

I'm also ok for a TT2 or a Dave later


----------



## jwbrent

Macaron said:


> I fully agree, Linn always said "source first" and I completely agree after having invested into the source here.
> The amplifier nor the speakers/headphone can reproduce something they never received
> The source is the foundation of the system.
> 
> I'm also ok for a TT2 or a Dave later



It all begins with the source component. The downstream components cannot improve upon the source, so I’m not surprised by your findings.


----------



## Nik74

This weekend I m expanding my headphone rig with the addition of a pair of Audio Note AX-2 standmounts  Very excited to hear what the Qutest will sound through speakers !


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> This weekend I m expanding my headphone rig with the addition of a pair of Audio Note AX-2 standmounts  Very excited to hear what the Qutest will sound through speakers !


Lucky you!

Post some pictures!


----------



## Nik74

WIll do for sure. It's a tiny room and the set up far from ideal but it will have to do for now. Lack of good space for a speaker set up was what brought me into the head fi world to start with but with my new amp being great for both headphones and speakers , I could not pass on the opportunity !


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> WIll do for sure. It's a tiny room and the set up far from ideal but it will have to do for now. Lack of good space for a speaker set up was what brought me into the head fi world to start with but with my new amp being great for both headphones and speakers , I could not pass on the opportunity !


Do these work in corners?


----------



## Sage Encore

Roybenz said:


> Hi did you go for the qutest? Was it better than the one in 430had?


Hi Roy,
I did get the Qutest and also the Pontus, but both are sold now and now with Terminator from Denafrips. The Qutest is a good but I did not like the digital glare and also from the built in DAC of the Simaudio which although is well implemented, not my cup of tea. I like warm detailed sound and hence got the Pontus and now hace upgraded to the Terminator after selling both the Qutest and the Pontus.


----------



## Roybenz

Sage Encore said:


> Hi Roy,
> I did get the Qutest and also the Pontus, but both are sold now and now with Terminator from Denafrips. The Qutest is a good but I did not like the digital glare and also from the built in DAC of the Simaudio which although is well implemented, not my cup of tea. I like warm detailed sound and hence got the Pontus and now hace upgraded to the Terminator after selling both the Qutest and the Pontus.



Thanks for input. Have you tried any of auralic dac?


----------



## Sage Encore

Roybenz said:


> Thanks for input. Have you tried any of auralic dac?


You are welcome. I have never listened to an Auralic before.


----------



## Nik74

Zzt231gr said:


> Do these work in corners?



Yes. In my setting one of them will be in a corner but the right side one , while close to the wall , will be far from the corner


----------



## Roybenz

Romi54 said:


> Is there a tonal difference regarding the power settings (1V, 2V or 3V)? Or does this only have to do with the volume?
> 
> Many Thanks!


Did you figure this out?


----------



## Ragnar-BY

I`ve used 3V and 1V settings for some time with my V200 amp. With 1V my system sounds better by a small margin. Tonally both settings are almost the same, but with 1V treble is smoother and overall sound signature seems darker (by a very small margin). YMMV, because I`m not sure what is causing this difference. It may be my amp, not the Qutest itself.


----------



## Triode User

It is not impossible that 3v is ever so slightly driving your amp into clipping and causing the slightly less smooth sound.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Violectric`s max input is rated as +21dBu, so it should be far from clipping at 3V, but who knows. Anyway, it`s great to have three different options in Qutest. One or another setting would do the job right.


----------



## Gibson59

I had another opportunity to demo the Qutest vs the Hugo 2 for about two hours yesterday with my HEKse/Lazuli Reference. I’m gonna do a longer write-up on the HEKse thread for anyone interested. But my main takeaway is that I absolutely prefer the sound of the Qutest over the Hugo 2. This is whether the Hugo 2 is serving as a DAC/line out only and powered by my Wells Milo amp or with HEKse plugged directly into the Hugo 2 using no external amplification (which many claim is ideal).  

I’m still in a bit of shock. After demoing these two against each other a month or two ago and having these same findings I though maybe I was a little nuts. But after this second time demoing them I’m certain about my personal opinion here. IMO if you don’t need portability and you have a good amp than the Qutest is this better sounding DAC... and cheaper! I’m mindful of course that the amp pairing with Qutest is important and my Milo may just have great synergy with it. But either way, it’s a Qutest for me over the Hugo 2 and it’s an easy choice after spending significant time with them on two different occasions in an ideal listening environment.


----------



## PY034

I’m using the Qutest with my Sennheiser HDV820. I didn’t quite understand SQ of the Qutest initially, and was wondering how on earth that Chord didn’t implement full balanced output. Would the Qutest had sounded different using a balanced output, well those were my whining, but SQ wise, I fully agree with it and somehow prefer it to the dac on my HDV820.


----------



## snatex

Ragnar-BY said:


> I`ve used 3V and 1V settings for some time with my V200 amp. With 1V my system sounds better by a small margin. Tonally both settings are almost the same, but with 1V treble is smoother and overall sound signature seems darker (by a very small margin). YMMV, because I`m not sure what is causing this difference. It may be my amp, not the Qutest itself.



Did you play with the pre-gain on the v200 to get the Qutest dialed in at the different voltages?


----------



## Ragnar-BY

snatex said:


> Did you play with the pre-gain on the v200 to get the Qutest dialed in at the different voltages?


No, I`m always using recommended (0) setting. I`ve tried to play with pre-gain with my previous DAC, but found the default setting to be most natural and returned to it.


----------



## jwbrent

Gibson59 said:


> I had another opportunity to demo the Qutest vs the Hugo 2 for about two hours yesterday with my HEKse/Lazuli Reference. I’m gonna do a longer write-up on the HEKse thread for anyone interested. But my main takeaway is that I absolutely prefer the sound of the Qutest over the Hugo 2. This is whether the Hugo 2 is serving as a DAC/line out only and powered by my Wells Milo amp or with HEKse plugged directly into the Hugo 2 using no external amplification (which many claim is ideal).
> 
> I’m still in a bit of shock. After demoing these two against each other a month or two ago and having these same findings I though maybe I was a little nuts. But after this second time demoing them I’m certain about my personal opinion here. IMO if you don’t need portability and you have a good amp than the Qutest is this better sounding DAC... and cheaper! I’m mindful of course that the amp pairing with Qutest is important and my Milo may just have great synergy with it. But either way, it’s a Qutest for me over the Hugo 2 and it’s an easy choice after spending significant time with them on two different occasions in an ideal listening environment.



Besides the galvanic input, perhaps another reason for the Qutest sounding better to you is the reduced resonance in its brick-like chassis.


----------



## jbarrentine

this might offend sensitive people


----------



## Roybenz

Anyone paired qutest with 430had? What Volt setting is the right one?


----------



## Joe-Siow

jbarrentine said:


> this might offend sensitive people



How so? It looks a perfectly serviceable setup


----------



## domho7

Nice setup


----------



## daredevil_kk

jbarrentine said:


> this might offend sensitive people


On the contrary, I think it is fantastic combination and a hint: if you wanna improve it farther, get a Long Dog (Dachshund) Audio MCRU analog supply/post filter for the Qutest. It will eliminate line harmonics and 30db better at all frequencies which lowers related jitter/phase noise to match up to DAVE specs.


----------



## jbarrentine

Joe-Siow said:


> How so? It looks a perfectly serviceable setup





daredevil_kk said:


> On the contrary, I think it is fantastic combination and a hint: if you wanna improve it farther, get a Long Dog (Dachshund) Audio MCRU analog supply/post filter for the Qutest. It will eliminate line harmonics and 30db better at all frequencies which lowers related jitter/phase noise to match up to DAVE specs.



Got the iFi 5v power for what it's worth. I doubt there's a discernible difference. Just checking boxes.


----------



## Baten

jbarrentine said:


> this might offend sensitive people


Perfectly understandable since the THX AAA is still not back as a drop. The Atom will have to do until then!



jbarrentine said:


> Got the iFi 5v power for what it's worth. I doubt there's a discernible difference. Just checking boxes.


Eh. The stock qutest PSU is perfectly fine, I'd even rather think the iFi is a downgrade than an upgrade really


----------



## Gibson59

Baten said:


> Eh. The stock qutest PSU is perfectly fine, I'd even rather think the iFi is a downgrade than an upgrade really



Actually I just picked up a Qutest and the guy I bought it from had an iFi Micro iUSB 3.0 that he’s letting me try out. Admittedly I was a bit skeptical at first, but I have to say I really like the effect it’s having on the sound. I’ve only had one night with it l, but I’ve been A/Bing back and forth with and without it in the chain and I much prefer with it. It’s both powering the Qutest and it’s bridging the USB connection between my Mac Mini and Qutest. 

Thus far I’d say anyone with a Qutest should give it (or something similar) a try. Obviously this is subjective and I’m sure some may prefer or simply be content with the sound without it in the chain. I get it if spending another $400 on top of the Qutest for moderate gains sounds silly... but I bought the Qutest as my end game DAC for the foreseeable future so I’m committed to getting the most out of it. I’ll try and get a bit more descriptive about what I like about it after I have more time with it. I will say though that there are immediate gains in soundstage size and instrument separation, there’s no denying it.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Gibson59 said:


> Actually I just picked up a Qutest and the guy I bought it from had an iFi Micro iUSB 3.0 that he’s letting me try out. Admittedly I was a bit skeptical at first, but I have to say I really like the effect it’s having on the sound. I’ve only had one night with it l, but I’ve been A/Bing back and forth with and without it in the chain and I much prefer with it. It’s both powering the Qutest and it’s bridging the USB connection between my Mac Mini and Qutest.
> 
> Thus far I’d say anyone with a Qutest should give it (or something similar) a try. Obviously this is subjective and I’m sure some may prefer or simply be content with the sound without it in the chain. I get it if spending another $400 on top of the Qutest for moderate gains sounds silly... but I bought the Qutest as my end game DAC for the foreseeable future so I’m committed to getting the most out of it. I’ll try and get a bit more descriptive about what I like about it after I have more time with it. I will say though that there are immediate gains in soundstage size and instrument separation, there’s no denying it.


Have you tried as a power supply only?


----------



## OctavianH

Gibson59 said:


> Actually I just picked up a Qutest and the guy I bought it from had an iFi Micro iUSB 3.0 that he’s letting me try out. Admittedly I was a bit skeptical at first, but I have to say I really like the effect it’s having on the sound. I’ve only had one night with it l, but I’ve been A/Bing back and forth with and without it in the chain and I much prefer with it. It’s both powering the Qutest and it’s bridging the USB connection between my Mac Mini and Qutest.
> 
> Thus far I’d say anyone with a Qutest should give it (or something similar) a try. Obviously this is subjective and I’m sure some may prefer or simply be content with the sound without it in the chain. I get it if spending another $400 on top of the Qutest for moderate gains sounds silly... but I bought the Qutest as my end game DAC for the foreseeable future so I’m committed to getting the most out of it. I’ll try and get a bit more descriptive about what I like about it after I have more time with it. I will say though that there are immediate gains in soundstage size and instrument separation, there’s no denying it.



How are you powering the iUSB3.0?


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> Actually I just picked up a Qutest and the guy I bought it from had an iFi Micro iUSB 3.0 that he’s letting me try out. Admittedly I was a bit skeptical at first, but I have to say I really like the effect it’s having on the sound. I’ve only had one night with it l, but I’ve been A/Bing back and forth with and without it in the chain and I much prefer with it. It’s both powering the Qutest and it’s bridging the USB connection between my Mac Mini and Qutest.
> 
> Thus far I’d say anyone with a Qutest should give it (or something similar) a try. Obviously this is subjective and I’m sure some may prefer or simply be content with the sound without it in the chain. I get it if spending another $400 on top of the Qutest for moderate gains sounds silly... but I bought the Qutest as my end game DAC for the foreseeable future so I’m committed to getting the most out of it. I’ll try and get a bit more descriptive about what I like about it after I have more time with it. I will say though that there are immediate gains in soundstage size and instrument separation, there’s no denying it.


Try good Usb cable or even Double sided cable you will be even further suprised with a difference


----------



## Roybenz (Apr 10, 2019)

Been trying the ifi ipower. And i feel that the sound gets a tad darker and smoother compared to stock power supply, but it kinda looses some of it crisp clarity with ipower, is that even possible? any one else tried ifi ipower? Its all connected to IsoTek evo 3 venus power center.


----------



## TSAVAlan

Roybenz said:


> Anyone paired qutest with 430had? What Volt setting is the right one?


Gave it a shot on the Qutest>430HAD>Ether 2. Had the best results at 1V and 2V, preferred the 2V. Definitely a step up in dac then the included dac on the Moon.


----------



## Deftone

Gibson59 said:


> Actually I just picked up a Qutest and the guy I bought it from had an iFi Micro iUSB 3.0 that he’s letting me try out. Admittedly I was a bit skeptical at first, but I have to say I really like the effect it’s having on the sound. I’ve only had one night with it l, but I’ve been A/Bing back and forth with and without it in the chain and I much prefer with it. It’s both powering the Qutest and it’s bridging the USB connection between my Mac Mini and Qutest.
> 
> Thus far I’d say anyone with a Qutest should give it (or something similar) a try. Obviously this is subjective and I’m sure some may prefer or simply be content with the sound without it in the chain. I get it if spending another $400 on top of the Qutest for moderate gains sounds silly... but I bought the Qutest as my end game DAC for the foreseeable future so I’m committed to getting the most out of it. I’ll try and get a bit more descriptive about what I like about it after I have more time with it. I will say though that there are immediate gains in soundstage size and instrument separation, there’s no denying it.



You could better that $400 iusb3.0 for less than $10.

https://www.amazon.com/KabelDirekt-...ay&sprefix=kabeldirekt+op,aps,201&sr=8-3&th=1


----------



## Gibson59 (Apr 11, 2019)

Deftone said:


> You could better that $400 iusb3.0 for less than $10.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/KabelDirekt-Optical-Digital-Theater-Playstation/dp/B00DI89WDW/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3EGO8Q8QTRSGV&keywords=kabeldirekt+optical+digital+audio+cable&qid=1554957281&s=gateway&sprefix=kabeldirekt+op,aps,201&sr=8-3&th=1



I’ve already got an audioquest Carbon optical cable. I’ve been spending time comparing optical to USB connection. I enjoy both but I’m leaning towards USB... sound is bit more dynamic, better instrument separation and the vocals seem a little more forward to which I like. The optical connection has a very smooth presentation and everything is very cohesive, highs feel a touch rolled off by comparison which isn’t necessarily bad.

I’m trying the USB implementation four different ways and getting four different results:

1) USB straight from Mac Mini to Qutest with Qutest stock power.

2) USB straight from Mac Mini to Qutest with  iFi iUSB providing the power to Qutest.

3)  iFi iUSB between Mac Mini to Qutest with the stock Qutest power.

 4) iFi iUSB between Mac Mini to Qutest with iFi iUSB providing the power.

I’m enjoying the experimentation so far. The great thing is each combo sounds wonderful, I just need to determine which sound is my preference. The Qutest is awesome.


----------



## Gibson59 (Apr 11, 2019)

One thing I’ve found is that using the green filter (incisive neutral with HG roll off) with the USB actually sounds a bit like the optical connection. There are some tracks where I’ve preferred the presence and dynamics of the USB implementation and some others where I’ve preferred the smoothness of the optical. So I may go with USB then just use the green filter when a song calls for it.

I’m loving the filters because their subtle but effective.


----------



## Deftone (Apr 11, 2019)

Gibson59 said:


> I’ve already got an audioquest Carbon optical cable. I’ve been spending time comparing optical to USB connection. I enjoy both but I’m leaning towards USB... sound is bit more dynamic, better instrument separation and the vocals seem a little more forward to which I like. The optical connection has a very smooth presentation and everything is very cohesive, highs feel a touch rolled off by comparison which isn’t necessarily bad.
> 
> I’m trying the USB implementation four different ways and getting four different results:
> 
> ...



Optical is the digital reference but usb is sometimes peoples preferred choice because it has better compatability with higher sample rates 192khz + DSD and the noise from usb artificially gives a more lively sound to set ups that might feel a bit warm.


----------



## Gibson59

Deftone said:


> Optical is the digital reference but usb is sometimes peoples preferred choice because it has better comparability with sample rates higher and 192 + DSD and the noise from usb artificially gives a more lively sound to set ups that might feel a bit warm.



Not challenging your assertion and I believe I’ve read that on this thread before (by @Rob Watts himself?), but would you mind telling me in laymen’s terms why optical is the digital reference?  Is it because of no jitter and no RF noise? I think I understand that RF noise adds some high end, but what on earth is jitter?

To be honest I perceive more of a difference than just a lively sound with USB... soundstage seems bigger and there seems to be more space between instruments, the sound is a little more neutral.  Not trying to start a war of optical vs USB, I really am not after trying to crown one as better, I just want to understand the differences from a technical standpoint as to why one may be considered the reference choice. 

If I only stream from Qobuz and am not getting anything higher than 192 then I lose out on nothing (aside from perceived sonic differences) if I go with optical right? And the argument for it is I don’t need to add a decrapifier etc in the chain? 

Sorry for all the disjointed questions. Any insights are appreciated!


----------



## x RELIC x

Gibson59 said:


> Not challenging your assertion and I believe I’ve read that on this thread before (by @Rob Watts himself?), but would you mind telling me in laymen’s terms why optical is the digital reference?  Is it because of no jitter and no RF noise? I think I understand that RF noise adds some high end, but what on earth is jitter?
> 
> To be honest I perceive more of a difference than just a lively sound with USB... soundstage seems bigger and there seems to be more space between instruments, the sound is a little more neutral.  Not trying to start a war of optical vs USB, I really am not after trying to crown one as better, I just want to understand the differences from a technical standpoint as to why one may be considered the reference choice.
> 
> ...



What you are describing as the differences is exactly what RF noise does to the sound, but it’s false. The common human perception with more brightness is a wider soundstage, more space, more detail, more ‘neutral’. You might prefer it and there’s no right or wrong with your preferences, but, as Rob describes, RF noise causing noise floor modulation is like MSG for audio spicing up the sound. The negative with this is that the sound becomes more flat and depth is reduced and nuance in timbre is reduced. Everything can sound harder. As was mentioned earlier, you can’t add darkness but more brightness is very very likely from RF noise.

Regarding jitter, it’s a timing difference between the source and the DAC and traditionally USB is the best choice for jitter as it’s asynchronous (the timing for the source comes from the DAC), but Rob’s DAC designs are immune to jitter on all inputs so it’s not even a consideration with Chord DACs, unlike many other traditional digital audio gear where optical could have bad jitter.


----------



## Arniesb

x RELIC x said:


> What you are describing as the differences is exactly what RF noise does to the sound, but it’s false. The common human perception with more brightness is a wider soundstage, more space, more detail, more ‘neutral’. You might prefer it and there’s no right or wrong with your preferences, but, as Rob describes, RF noise causing noise floor modulation is like MSG for audio spicing up the sound. The negative with this is that the sound becomes more flat and depth is reduced and nuance in timbre is reduced. Everything can sound harder. As was mentioned earlier, you can’t add darkness but more brightness is very very likely from RF noise.
> 
> Regarding jitter, it’s a timing difference between the source and the DAC and traditionally USB is the best choice for jitter as it’s asynchronous (the timing for the source comes from the DAC), but Rob’s DAC designs are immune to jitter on all inputs so it’s not even a consideration with Chord DACs, unlike many other traditional digital audio gear where optical could have bad jitter.


If brighter is wider then why All high end dacs, amps sound wider than average dacs, amps? Makes 0 sense. If anything drop in noise floor makes Everything smoother more dynamic and wider. Why does Dave sound much smoother  and wider than Hugo 2 for example? Noise makes Everything forward not wide from everything  i heard.


----------



## x RELIC x (Apr 11, 2019)

Arniesb said:


> If brighter is wider then why All high end dacs, amps sound wider than average dacs, amps? Makes 0 sense. If anything drop in noise floor makes Everything smoother more dynamic and wider. Why does Dave sound much smoother  and wider than Hugo 2 for example? Noise makes Everything forward not wide from everything  i heard.



Might not make sense to you but it does to me. I also didn't say a brighter sound is the only contributor. You can pick apart my perspective/comment but there are many things that contribute to a wide soundstage. I was simply talking about how brightness adds to the perception. You might perceive it as forward, that's fine. I do disagree with you that ALL high end gear has a wider soundstage, let's leave it at that.

Personally, I feel the Hugo2 sounds wider than the DAVE, where I find the DAVE has more depth and a more balanced soundscape. Difference of perspective I guess and I'm not here to argue with anyone.

Typically brighter gear usually has comments that it has a wide soundstage. It's a recurring theme with headphones, amps, DACs. Easy to see the repeated pattern in comments regarding a perceived wide soundstage and bright gear. Not always the case but it's very common.

Besides, we were talking about how the USB input is contributing to the _relative_ differences noted, not comparing different gear. And technically, I would say that the relationship between the highs and mids is more of what causes an overall wide soundstage. You took my reply to someone else out of context though and it doesn't relate to what you've brought up.


----------



## Deftone (Apr 12, 2019)

Gibson59 said:


> Not challenging your assertion and I believe I’ve read that on this thread before (by @Rob Watts himself?), but would you mind telling me in laymen’s terms why optical is the digital reference?  Is it because of no jitter and no RF noise? I think I understand that RF noise adds some high end, but what on earth is jitter?
> 
> To be honest I perceive more of a difference than just a lively sound with USB... soundstage seems bigger and there seems to be more space between instruments, the sound is a little more neutral.  Not trying to start a war of optical vs USB, I really am not after trying to crown one as better, I just want to understand the differences from a technical standpoint as to why one may be considered the reference choice.
> 
> ...



@x RELIC x gave a good explanation above

 Opitical is reference because its completely isolated so it adds nothing at all but its usually avoided because of the problems with jitter but as you can see here from this post by Rob in 2016 about Mojo, its really not a problem. People are spending hundreds of dollars on multiple add on devices trying to get USB galvanicly isolated on the level of optical so if you got a chord dac, spend less than $10 and you wont get better than that (unless you like the noise from USB).



Rob Watts said:


> Using an APX555 and the 24 bit J-test file at 48k I get with optical:
> 
> 
> There are some asynchronous jitter components just visible at -160dB.
> ...


----------



## Roybenz

I have tried jutterbug, cant tell any difference. Rob also answerd me that jitterbug wont work on qutest. Since it already does the same thing as the jitterbug does.


----------



## Roybenz

Anyone know if using audeze dsp in roon will affect the qutest in a negative way?


----------



## Deftone

Roybenz said:


> Anyone know if using audeze dsp in roon will affect the qutest in a negative way?



If it's just a eq preset then no


----------



## Deftone

Roybenz said:


> I have tried jutterbug, cant tell any difference. Rob also answerd me that jitterbug wont work on qutest. Since it already does the same thing as the jitterbug does.



I think jitterbug would be betterbsuited for Hugo 2 because it doesn't have the same isolation as qutest because it would draw too much power for portable use.


----------



## Roybenz (Apr 12, 2019)

Deftone said:


> If it's just a eq preset then no


 Audeze presets apply carefully designed filters specific to the selected Audeze headphone models. In addition to using our headphones “flat (no EQ)” these filters can be used to provide a listening experience similar to great speakers in a typical well treated room. Additionally, you can tweak these filters by using Roon’s built-in EQ and crossfeed settings. Importantly, each preset has the calibration filters for all commonly used sample rates (44.1kHz to 768kHz) to avoid resampling. Audeze is able to do this because we have our own digital hardware and software engineers, as well as our experience working with Audio Precision in developing headphone-specific test equipment.

Im not sure if its only an eq... hmm


----------



## snatex

Roybenz said:


> Anyone know if using audeze dsp in roon will affect the qutest in a negative way?



Roon upscales from 16 to 64 bit before applying Audeze presets and then back to 32 bit after applying so you might be losing some of the Qutest magic and transparency when using it. Rob recommends sending non altered bit perfect data when possible.


----------



## flyte3333

Gibson59 said:


> I had another opportunity to demo the Qutest vs the Hugo 2 for about two hours yesterday with my HEKse/Lazuli Reference. I’m gonna do a longer write-up on the HEKse thread for anyone interested. But my main takeaway is that I absolutely prefer the sound of the Qutest over the Hugo 2. This is whether the Hugo 2 is serving as a DAC/line out only and powered by my Wells Milo amp or with HEKse plugged directly into the Hugo 2 using no external amplification (which many claim is ideal).
> 
> I’m still in a bit of shock. After demoing these two against each other a month or two ago and having these same findings I though maybe I was a little nuts. But after this second time demoing them I’m certain about my personal opinion here. IMO if you don’t need portability and you have a good amp than the Qutest is this better sounding DAC... and cheaper! I’m mindful of course that the amp pairing with Qutest is important and my Milo may just have great synergy with it. But either way, it’s a Qutest for me over the Hugo 2 and it’s an easy choice after spending significant time with them on two different occasions in an ideal listening environment.



Hi, was this using the USB inputs of both Qutest and Hugo2? 

And  Hugo2 plugged into the wall (AC power), or running off it's internal battery only?

Cheers!


----------



## Gibson59

Em2016 said:


> Hi, was this using the USB inputs of both Qutest and Hugo2?
> 
> And  Hugo2 plugged into the wall (AC power), or running off it's internal battery only?
> 
> Cheers!



I was using USB on both Qutest and Hugo 2 and tried both the battery and wall power (desktop mode) for Hugo 2. In each case I preferred Qutest.


----------



## Gibson59 (Apr 13, 2019)

x RELIC x said:


> RF noise causing noise floor modulation is like MSG for audio spicing up the sound. The negative with this is that the sound becomes more flat and depth is reduced and nuance in timbre is reduced. Everything can sound harder. As was mentioned earlier, you can’t add darkness but more brightness is very very likely from RF noise.



Your explanation of the impact of RF noise is spot on to what I’m hearing. I have to admit that the more time I spend listening even more carefully and for longer periods I’m finding myself leaning towards optical now (I can admit when I’m wrong lol). The depth and nuance in timber of optical is very evident, as is the detail and decay of notes. Normally when we mention detail I tend to think of treble, but in this case the detail I’m hearing via optical are things like subtle vibrato in a vocal notes that are trailing off and nuanced dynamics in each note that really seems to have more depth to it and sounds more lifelike.

Via USB it certainly does sound a little harder as you put it and this seems to lessen the subtle nuance of each note with both instruments and vocals. Treble is increased.  With USB instruments sometimes have more energy but also sound more digital. Vocals sound a bit more forward but also noticeably flatter. However there have been times where the harder USB sonics don’t take away from the song and are welcomed. But on well recorded high res tracks a little of the magic seems to to be lost with USB.

Optical sounds a little more organic to my ear and more like vinyl (I’m a huge vinyl buff, my other expensive addiction) where USB sounds a bit digital and has that edge. I’m getting lost in the music easier via optical.  The main thing I like about the USB implementation is it sounds like the presence gets a db boost and the bass seems to hit just a little bit harder.

Thanks for the great explanation regarding RF noise. Being able to articulate in my mind what I’m hearing has helped me better compare them. In the end I will probably leave both optical and USB connected, using optical 90% and USB 10% depending on what music I’m listening to. I’m going to treat them like two different filters I have at my disposal.  And USB will be there for me for if/when I stream even higher res files.

I’m using Audioquest Carbon for both optical and USB cables btw. Do the high end cables make a difference here? Who knows, but I’ve spent so much time and money trying to perfect my system I just said screw it and sprung for the expensive cables.

I can easily say that I’m beyond nit picking here and if If it were not for me listening very critically in a perfectly quiet environment, with a high end chain and choosing the right tracks to expose sonic differences, it might be hard to identify all the subtle differences between optical and USB. At the end of the day they both sound fantastic. But part of the fun is picking this stuff apart!


----------



## Gibson59

x RELIC x said:


> Regarding jitter, it’s a timing difference between the source and the DAC and traditionally USB is the best choice for jitter as it’s asynchronous (the timing for the source comes from the DAC), but Rob’s DAC designs are immune to jitter on all inputs so it’s not even a consideration with Chord DACs, unlike many other traditional digital audio gear where optical could have bad jitter.



Another great explanation, thank you. Would you mind briefly explaining what jitter actually sounds like? I’ve heard references to jitter countless times, but I’ve never come across the explanation of how it sounds in any threads.


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> Your explanation of the impact of RF noise is spot on to what I’m hearing. I have to admit that the more time I spend listening even more carefully and for longer periods I’m finding myself leaning towards optical now (I can admit when I’m wrong lol). The depth and nuance in timber of optical is very evident, as is the detail and decay of notes. Normally when we mention detail I tend to think of treble, but in this case the detail I’m hearing via optical are things like subtle vibrato in a vocal notes that are trailing off and nuanced dynamics in each note that really seems to have more depth to it and sounds more lifelike.
> 
> Via USB it certainly does sound a little harder as you put it and this seems to lessen the subtle nuance of each note with both instruments and vocals. Treble is increased.  With USB instruments sometimes have more energy but also sound more digital. Vocals sound a bit more forward but also noticeably flatter. However there have been times where the harder USB sonics don’t take away from the song and are welcomed. But on well recorded high res tracks a little of the magic seems to to be lost with USB.
> 
> ...


Cables make bigger difference than Decrapifiers actually when it comes to smoothnes. Was always getting fatigue from Aq usb cables on most dacs and Ifi Nano usb 3.0 amplified this harshness. With better made usb cables there is lot less brightness than with Aq cables. I dont think Aq designer make anything good for usb. cables suck, jitterbug suck too.


----------



## Gibson59

Arniesb said:


> Cables make bigger difference than Decrapifiers actually when it comes to smoothnes. Was always getting fatigue from Aq usb cables on most dacs and Ifi Nano usb 3.0 amplified this harshness. With better made usb cables there is lot less brightness than with Aq cables. I dont think Aq designer make anything good for usb. cables suck, jitterbug suck too.



Actually I did a USB cable comparison last year between a bunch and the Audioquest Carbon truly outclassed the others.  Not to say there aren't better USB cables out there, but I don't think the AQ Carbon USB is a slouch.


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> Actually I did a USB cable comparison last year between a bunch and the Audioquest Carbon truly outclassed the others.  Not to say there aren't better USB cables out there, but I don't think the AQ Carbon USB is a slouch.


They only use great metals, but very poor design. Thats why they sound forward, bright, digital.


----------



## Gibson59 (Apr 13, 2019)

Arniesb said:


> They only use great metals, but very poor design. Thats why they sound forward, bright, digital.



Interesting. Have you compared your Qutest with your USB cable of choice to the optical connection with a cable of equal quality? If so, I’d like to hear your findings.

And what USB cable are you using? I’m certainly game for trying another one. I suppose what your suggesting re the AQ Carbon is that it has great metal but it has poor shielding? And therefore more RF noise and perceived brightness/hardness?


----------



## betula

Gibson59 said:


> Actually I did a USB cable comparison last year between a bunch and the Audioquest Carbon truly outclassed the others.  Not to say there aren't better USB cables out there, but I don't think the AQ Carbon USB is a slouch.





Arniesb said:


> Cables make bigger difference than Decrapifiers actually when it comes to smoothnes. Was always getting fatigue from Aq usb cables on most dacs and Ifi Nano usb 3.0 amplified this harshness. With better made usb cables there is lot less brightness than with Aq cables. I dont think Aq designer make anything good for usb. cables suck, jitterbug suck too.


Decrapifiers and cables are slippery slope on Head-Fi. The amount of difference they can bring is often overestimated and it deceives people who are new to the hobby.

Sure they do make a difference, but must come last in the audio chain. Once you have got your prefect 1-2-3 headphones, best 1-2 amps and best DAC you can start to spend your money on cables.  

Also, these subtle improvements are very much system dependant. Some systems are more noisy, some are less noisy (even if someone doesn't realise the noise). Some might have grounding issues, some don't. 

Reading about the effect of upgrade cables and decrapifiers is very subjective and relative, therefore it must be taken with a grain of salt.

Let me share my experience.
I find the Jitterbug useful regardless the amps or DACs I own. Probably takes off the majority of my laptop noise. I have been using it for many years. 

I absolutely loved the iFi iPurifier 3 on my 2Qute. It just added a lot more clarity, it was an instant buy for me. 
With the Qutest however I couldn't hear a difference, so I sold the iPurifier 3. 

Regarding cables, it is even more complicated, more subtle. My QED Graphite USB cable was definitely better than any basic USB cable.
In another setup I had also tried QED Reference and AQ Cinnamon cables.
My current USB cable is the Wireworld Ultraviolet 7. To me this is the sweet spot of price to performance ratio at the moment. Definitely a cleaner and tighter sound with a blacker background, but it is all relative. 

I think even the best cables won't give you more than 5-10% overall improvement. Spending hundreds on cables and decrapifiers is purely insane. And a big mistake IMO. 

These extras should not worth more than 5-10% of your entire audio chain.


----------



## Gibson59

I've demoed tons of cables over the years for various connections (USB, headphone cables, optical, speaker cables). I'm aware they are one of the final considerations, but to me an important one nonetheless that I always carefully consider.  I'm not interested in any debate about the difference they make (spend three pages going back and forth about whether cables matter which happens too much around here).  I simply want to hear from anyone who has a specific USB they like with Qutest that they've chosen over others they've auditioned.


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> Interesting. Have you compared your Qutest with your USB cable of choice to the optical connection with a cable of equal quality? If so, I’d like to hear your findings.
> 
> And what USB cable are you using? I’m certainly game for trying another one. I suppose what your suggesting re the AQ Carbon is that it has great metal but it has poor shielding? And therefore more RF noise and perceived brightness/hardness?


I had tried On 2qute, but i have friends who tried Different cables and stuff on qutest. Optical always gonna sound smoother, but Good decrapifier + Great usb cable outperforms optical. Round cable design gonna sound harsher cause ground plane is not separeted well enough from signal wires. Wireworld flat desing, Curious outside ground plane desing and double sided cables Like IFi gemini, Jcat reference is what is great designs are.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> Decrapifiers and cables are slippery slope on Head-Fi. The amount of difference they can bring is often overestimated and it deceives people who are new to the hobby.
> 
> Sure they do make a difference, but must come last in the audio chain. Once you have got your prefect 1-2-3 headphones, best 1-2 amps and best DAC you can start to spend your money on cables.
> 
> ...


Rabbit hole i think should be right word. It pushes you forward into abyss. +1 wireworld even cheap ones is good enough.


----------



## betula

Gibson59 said:


> I've demoed tons of cables over the years for various connections (USB, headphone cables, optical, speaker cables). I'm aware they are one of the final considerations, but to me an important one nonetheless that I always carefully consider.  I'm not interested in any debate about the difference they make (spend three pages going back and forth about whether cables matter which happens too much around here).  I simply want to hear from anyone who has a specific USB they like with Qutest that they've chosen over others they've auditioned.


Well, I prefer my Ultraviolet 7 to the AQ Cinnamon, QED Reference and QED Graphite. I would never spend more than £100 on a cable though. I found the Jitterbug helpful with all of these cables. Supra cables have a ginormous fan base, I have never tried them.

Cinnamon was clean and bright but not necessarily pleasing or alive. QED Graphite is just not on the level of the 3 others. QED Reference is very clean and tight but physically so stiff I couldn't live with it. Ultraviolet 7 to my ears and needs in my system combines perfect value for price with the most possible clarity and black background while it still maintains a warm and alive nature, not suffocating the music in artificial cleanliness but letting it live in clarity. 

I would never spend more than £100 on a cable though or more than 10% of my entire system.


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> I've demoed tons of cables over the years for various connections (USB, headphone cables, optical, speaker cables). I'm aware they are one of the final considerations, but to me an important one nonetheless that I always carefully consider.  I'm not interested in any debate about the difference they make (spend three pages going back and forth about whether cables matter which happens too much around here).  I simply want to hear from anyone who has a specific USB they like with Qutest that they've chosen over others they've auditioned.


For qutest i think from what i heard silver cable is not good... Too bright. Wireworld cheap ones or silver starlight is great or if you want costlier Jcat reference or Ifi gemini would be awesome.
Personally I bought Wireworld starlight 7 platinum for potential Qutest pairing, but later got into some financial issues, so qutest buy have to wait for further evaluations.


----------



## Arniesb

betula said:


> Well, I prefer my Ultraviolet 7 to the AQ Cinnamon, QED Reference and QED Graphite. I would never spend more than £100 on a cable though. I found the Jitterbug helpful with all of these cables. Supra cables have a ginormous fan base, I have never tried them.
> 
> Cinnamon was clean and bright but not necessarily pleasing or alive. QED Graphite is just not on the level of the 3 others. QED Reference is very clean and tight but physically so stiff I couldn't live with it. Ultraviolet 7 to my ears and needs in my system combines perfect value for price with the most possible clarity and black background while it still maintains a warm and alive nature, not suffocating the music in artificial cleanliness but letting it live in clarity.
> 
> I would never spend more than £100 on a cable though or more than 10% of my entire system.


What i realy like about Wireworld its that they are not shady company. They always show desing, Materials quality, have great warranty and support.


----------



## Roybenz

Cant hear any difference with or without the jitterbug on the heimdall usb. ifi ipower makes the qutest a tiny bit smoother than Stock power supply.


----------



## Arniesb

I think thats because you have imac. Gaming pc's have a lot more powerfull components which make more noise.


----------



## Deftone

Arniesb said:


> Optical always gonna sound smoother, but Good decrapifier + Great usb cable outperforms optical.



Optical cant take away and make the sound darker from reference point you have to remember that, the sound you get from optical is what it is. USB adds to the sound so you can use many devices to reduce the noise and try to get it as low as possible to try to get as close to opitical, if perfect isolation is acheived with USB it will sound just like the optical, darker and smoother.

If USB outperforms it to you then that is because of your preference for sound not because it actually gets lower noise than optical which inst technically possible.


----------



## Triode User

Deftone said:


> Optical cant take away and make the sound darker from reference point you have to remember that, the sound you get from optical is what it is. USB adds to the sound so you can use many devices to reduce the noise and try to get it as low as possible to try to get as close to opitical, if perfect isolation is acheived with USB it will sound just like the optical, darker and smoother.
> 
> If USB outperforms it to you then that is because of your preference for sound not because it actually gets lower noise than optical which inst technically possible.



My Innuos Zenith SE only outputs usb as is the case for their top of the range £10k Zenith Statement which is completely designed around being low noise and also only has USB out. When I asked them about why they didn’t use optical, bearing in mind its RF isolating aspects, they said it was not that simple. For instance, if their usb output was already RF free due to their design within the Zenith then it could outperform optical for noise at the ultimate end of things because the optical converter inside the dac can itself generate electrical noise into the converted signal within the dac. They came to this conclusion have measured both options.

So, whilst in general terms optical is better than usb for RF noise it is perhaps possible that those of us who use usb might actually have the ultimate system interface if our usb source is already noise free. Obviously there are copious amounts of YMMV in this.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Been upgrading my setup in stages. 
Recently changed my wall receptacle to Furutech and also added a Plixir power conditioner with a new power cord incoming. 

Will be looking at my source in the next few months. 
Currently using an SOTM SMS-200 at the moment.
Am looking at the Melco N100 or Innuos Zem Mk 3.
Tiny chance but just wondering if anyone has had the chance the compare the 2?


----------



## OctavianH

Gibson59 said:


> I’ve already got an audioquest Carbon optical cable. I’ve been spending time comparing optical to USB connection. I enjoy both but I’m leaning towards USB... sound is bit more dynamic, better instrument separation and the vocals seem a little more forward to which I like. The optical connection has a very smooth presentation and everything is very cohesive, highs feel a touch rolled off by comparison which isn’t necessarily bad.
> 
> I’m trying the USB implementation four different ways and getting four different results:
> 
> ...



Can you describe the difference in sound presentation when switching between these 4 combos?


----------



## PY034

I have been using the Qutest's RCA output into Sennheiser HDV820's XLR input since day 1 owning it, which I mentioned that it took me a while to understand the Qutest (due to burning in process and as well as the changes was pretty subtle)

Two weeks gone with estimated usage of 80 hours, I decided to experiment with RCA cables from Audioquest's signature series which I borrowed from my dealer. I was TOTAL GOBSMACKED by the improvement of the sound quality which was very prominent and I was so surprised as I had never thought a cable would have provided.


----------



## Nik74

Well the cable you mention at £5999 is more expensive than Qutest plus MScaler so I would hope it makes a noticeable improvement


----------



## kumar402

Nik74 said:


> Well the cable you mention at £5999 is more expensive than Qutest plus MScaler so I would hope it makes a noticeable improvement


Omg 6K for pair of RCA


----------



## PY034

Nik74 said:


> Well the cable you mention at £5999 is more expensive than Qutest plus MScaler so I would hope it makes a noticeable improvement


----------



## Baten

kumar402 said:


> Omg 6K for pair of RCA


World's gone mad


----------



## Narayan23

kumar402 said:


> Omg 6K for pair of RCA





Baten said:


> World's gone mad



That´s relatively affordable in the world of audiophilia, check out these $30,000 Siltech interconnects:

https://www.thecableco.com/triple-crown-interconnect-pair.html

$17,500 power cable : https://www.thecableco.com/triple-crown-power-cord.html
$65,000 speaker cable : https://www.thecableco.com/triple-crown-speaker-cable-pair.html


----------



## Nik74

PY034 said:


> I have been using the Qutest's RCA output into Sennheiser HDV820's XLR input since day 1 owning it, which I mentioned that it took me a while to understand the Qutest (due to burning in process and as well as the changes was pretty subtle)
> 
> Two weeks gone with estimated usage of 80 hours, I decided to experiment with RCA cables from Audioquest's signature series which I borrowed from my dealer. I was TOTAL GOBSMACKED by the improvement of the sound quality which was very prominent and I was so surprised as I had never thought a cable would have provided.





Narayan23 said:


> That´s relatively affordable in the world of audiophilia, check out these $30,000 Siltech interconnects:
> 
> https://www.thecableco.com/triple-crown-interconnect-pair.html
> 
> ...



Mortgage deposit down payment or speaker cables... hmmm decisions , decisions lol


----------



## betula

Narayan23 said:


> That´s relatively affordable in the world of audiophilia, check out these $30,000 Siltech interconnects:
> 
> https://www.thecableco.com/triple-crown-interconnect-pair.html
> 
> ...


Who is buying these cables honestly? From the price of one RCA cable I could pretty much put together a dream system or two. 
I guess they don't need to sell too many of these since from the profit of selling one cable they can cover someones salary for a year in the cable store.


----------



## Roybenz (Apr 16, 2019)

Very litte bang for buck these expensive cables lol

I let my qutest run for about 100hrs. Cant tell any difference after "burn in"


----------



## jwbrent

Roybenz said:


> Very litte bang for buck these expensive cables lol
> 
> I let my qutest run for about 100hrs. Cant tell any difference after "burn in"



I believe @Rob Watts has stated similar feelings, but it doesn’t negate those who do hear subtleties that improve the sound. Like all of our senses, we each have unique capabilities shared by some but not by others. No big deal.


----------



## jwbrent

betula said:


> Who is buying these cables honestly? From the price of one RCA cable I could pretty much put together a dream system or two.
> I guess they don't need to sell too many of these since from the profit of selling one cable they can cover someones salary for a year in the cable store.



The Asian market when I was in the high end audio biz was a big market for expensive cables.

When a customer buys, for example, a $200,000 sound system, they clearly have the means to afford exotic cables. Components in this price category have the resolving power to reveal the subtle and not so subtle results, and although these differences for the price seem outrageous to most audio enthusiasts, to the well off spenders, it’s worth it because their system sounds better and the pride of ownership is increased.


----------



## PY034

I reckon for my case with the audioquest signature, I was able to easily differentiate the difference. But then again, it could also be a case that any rca might have done the same job, but I’m not the position the affirm that as I don’t any other rca at the moment.


----------



## Joe-Siow

The topic of cabling is very polarizing. Personally I buy the cable argument as I have had the opportunity to try a few of Chris' Black Cat cables and clearly hear the differences in my own setup
Ultimately I would say buy whatever you can afford or am comfortable with, be it $5 or $5000 cables
So long you are happy with your purchases, that is all that matters


----------



## betula

jwbrent said:


> The Asian market when I was in the high end audio biz was a big market for expensive cables.
> 
> When a customer buys, for example, a $200,000 sound system, they clearly have the means to afford exotic cables. Components in this price category have the resolving power to reveal the subtle and not so subtle results, and although these differences for the price seem outrageous to most audio enthusiasts, to the well off spenders, it’s worth it because their system sounds better and the pride of ownership is increased.


We were talking about $30-60.000 cables. That's way too much even for a $200.000 system. I do believe cables bring subtle differences, but IMO they shouldn't worth more than 10% of all your system. $60.000 cables also bring up ethical questions in my eyes.


----------



## Triode User

betula said:


> We were talking about $30-60.000 cables. That's way too much even for a $200.000 system. I do believe cables bring subtle differences, but IMO they shouldn't worth more than 10% of all your system. $60.000 cables also bring up ethical questions in my eyes.



Some people spend up to £1m on their audio systems. I heard about one guy who spent that and then never even switched it on, it was just a status thing.  More money than sense? maybe but for him £1m probably doesn't even make a dent in his bank account and if rich people spend their money then at least it keeps it in circulation and helps economies instead of just leaving it in the bank.


----------



## Joe-Siow

betula said:


> We were talking about $30-60.000 cables. That's way too much even for a $200.000 system. I do believe cables bring subtle differences, but IMO they shouldn't worth more than 10% of all your system. $60.000 cables also bring up ethical questions in my eyes.



I have a friend who is on full loom Nordost Odin 2 cables. Value and price notwithstanding, we were stunned by the improvement from just a pair of RCA cables. It was truly a jaw meet floor moment
Also, the question of ethics is really debatable since it's a simple matter of economics; if there's demand there will be supply in the market.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Joe-Siow said:


> I have a friend who is on full loom Nordost Odin 2 cables. Value and price notwithstanding, we were stunned by the improvement from just a pair of RCA cables. It was truly a jaw meet floor moment
> Also, the question of ethics is really debatable since it's a simple matter of economics; if there's demand there will be supply in the market.


So,should we upgrade cables instead of buying better equipment?

What more has a very expensive interconnect offer than Belden's 1694A?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Zzt231gr said:


> So,should we upgrade cables instead of buying better equipment?
> 
> What more has a very expensive interconnect offer than Belden's 1694A?



You say that without knowing the equipment he is on so perhaps you're missing the point entirely?
Anyway I've learnt from my years in the hobby that everything matters in the audio chain; from equipment to power to cabling to accessories
So these days I keep an open mind to everyrhing


----------



## OctavianH

Speaking of cables and USB cables in particular, I wonder if anyone using a PC as a source tried to use a PCI-ex USB3.0 card instead of a normal USB3.0 port on the motherboard to connect the Qutest. I mean, all try to filter and reclock using different devices, but it would be good to know if a dedicated USB card makes a difference.


----------



## Arniesb

It might improve things. Doesnt matter how good dac is. Good source is important.


----------



## MagnusH

OctavianH said:


> Speaking of cables and USB cables in particular, I wonder if anyone using a PC as a source tried to use a PCI-ex USB3.0 card instead of a normal USB3.0 port on the motherboard to connect the Qutest. I mean, all try to filter and reclock using different devices, but it would be good to know if a dedicated USB card makes a difference.


I don't have the Qutest, I have the new (excellent) RME ADI-2 DAC, but as you I also play directly from computer. In my case and with my DAC I found toslink to be the best option (I use a Lifatec toslink cable), and since Chord DACs also have excellent jitter suppression I would guess its the same for you.

Yes, you lose out on some higher sample rates, but its not like those matters much. 192Khz and DSD64 (DoP) is enough for me at least, and toslink gives 100% galvanic isolation from the electronic chaos that is a typical desktop computer.


----------



## OctavianH

MagnusH said:


> I don't have the Qutest, I have the new (excellent) RME ADI-2 DAC, but as you I also play directly from computer. In my case and with my DAC I found toslink to be the best option (I use a Lifatec toslink cable), and since Chord DACs also have excellent jitter suppression I would guess its the same for you.
> 
> Yes, you lose out on some higher sample rates, but its not like those matters much. 192Khz and DSD64 (DoP) is enough for me at least, and toslink gives 100% galvanic isolation from the electronic chaos that is a typical desktop computer.



Unfortunately on TOSLINK I have a Cambridge Audio CXC and I do not want to remove it.


----------



## MagnusH

OctavianH said:


> Unfortunately on TOSLINK I have a Cambridge Audio CXC and I do not want to remove it.


Then I would use a streamer/transport between, like the cheap Allo USBridge or maybe the new Pro-Ject Stream Box S2 Ultra


----------



## Gibson59

Roon/Qobuz (Mac mini) -> optical cable -> Qutest DAC -> Wells Milo amp -> Lazuli Reference cable -> HEKse + Hans Zimmer (hi-res) = Audio Nirvana!!!


----------



## Gibson59

I’m finding that Qutest via optical and HEKse have amazing synergy.


----------



## betula

Gibson59 said:


> I’m finding that Qutest via optical and HEKse have amazing synergy.


I am finding that Qutest has amazing synergy with anything I plug it into.


----------



## TSAVAlan

betula said:


> I am finding that Qutest has amazing synergy with anything I plug it into.


It most certainly does. Recently the Qutest has been a bit more popular than usual from what I have been seeing.


----------



## Gibson59

TSAVAlan said:


> It most certainly does. Recently the Qutest has been a bit more popular than usual from what I have been seeing.



I’ve had the chance to listen to a lot of the high-end DACs now and I really think that Qutest is an incredible value. It easily competes with Yggy and punches way above it’s price point in general. I would have to be absolutely blown away at this point to spend anymore money to upgrade from Qutest.


----------



## Arniesb

Gibson59 said:


> I’ve had the chance to listen to a lot of the high-end DACs now and I really think that Qutest is an incredible value. It easily competes with Yggy and punches way above it’s price point in general. I would have to be absolutely blown away at this point to spend anymore money to upgrade from Qutest.


Ye Qutest and Hugo tt2 looks like great value no doubt. Cant imagine how good Dave 2 will be.


----------



## Roybenz (Apr 17, 2019)

Gibson59 said:


> I’ve had the chance to listen to a lot of the high-end DACs now and I really think that Qutest is an incredible value. It easily competes with Yggy and punches way above it’s price point in general. I would have to be absolutely blown away at this point to spend anymore money to upgrade from Qutest.


Agreed, i feel the same. It really pulls out all the details and gives you amazing vocals. Any Next step up is little value for money imho. As you would have to spend double or more for about the same performance.


----------



## turbomustang84

Compared to other companies Chord seems to rarely support balanced Headphones.

Even the Dave has Balanced outputs but the Headphone output is just 1/4".

Any idea why ?


----------



## x RELIC x (Apr 17, 2019)

turbomustang84 said:


> Compared to other companies Chord seems to rarely support balanced Headphones.
> 
> Even the Dave has Balanced outputs but the Headphone output is just 1/4".
> 
> Any idea why ?



The DAVE’s balanced output does not have enough Current to drive headphones (it’s very low) and is there for convenience for adding balanced amps. The answer from the designer in the DAVE thread regarding balanced in general...



Rob Watts said:


> Component count is very important for transparency. Doubling the number of parts in the direct signal path does degrade depth perception and detail resolution.
> 
> But there is another problem with balanced operation. Imagine a balanced differential in, differential out amplifier. The input stage is normally a differential pair (maybe cascoded) with a constant current source. Now the input stage is free to move up and down to accommodate the common mode voltage - but the input stage common mode impedance is non linear, and if the common mode voltage has a signal component (it always will have due to component tolerances) then this will create a signal dependent error current, thereby generating distortion. Unfortunately, the negative feedback loop of the amplifier can't correct for this distortion as it can't see the error on the summing nodes. So there will always be a limit to the performance. With SE operation, this problem does not occur, as the differential input stage is clamped to ground.
> 
> ...


----------



## turbomustang84

x RELIC x said:


> The DAVE’s balanced output does not have enough Current to drive headphones (it’s very low) and is there for convenience for adding balanced amps. The answer from the designer in the DAVE thread regarding balanced in general...




Thanks


----------



## Joe-Siow

Gibson59 said:


> I’ve had the chance to listen to a lot of the high-end DACs now and I really think that Qutest is an incredible value. It easily competes with Yggy and punches way above it’s price point in general. I would have to be absolutely blown away at this point to spend anymore money to upgrade from Qutest.









Funny that u should bring up the Yggy. I have one on loan from a friend at the moment and I have been listening and comparing it to the Qutest

Personally I find Yggy sounds very slightly better overall
They are 2 different sounding DACs
Yggy is more laid-back and relaxed sounding while Qutest excels in imaging and details retrieval

Where the Qutest truly has an edge over Yggy is the price; Qutest is available here for around USD $1,630 while I reckon Yggy retails for around USD $2,599


----------



## jwbrent

betula said:


> We were talking about $30-60.000 cables. That's way too much even for a $200.000 system. I do believe cables bring subtle differences, but IMO they shouldn't worth more than 10% of all your system. $60.000 cables also bring up ethical questions in my eyes.



Actually, 15-20% of the system value is budgeted for cables at the very high end.


----------



## jbarrentine (Apr 18, 2019)

Except Yggdrasil apparently measures like complete junk (crap. let's say it) and Qutest measures exceptionally well. The modi 3 is really the most competent dac schiit makes according to people who talk measurements.

Schiit got away for a very long time making JUNK they weren't even measuring. What we learned was that distortion is pleasing in a way to a lot of people.

But it doesn't sound better than competent design.


----------



## Joe-Siow

jbarrentine said:


> Except Yggdrasil measures like complete junk (****. let's say it) and Qutest measures exceptionally well. The modi 3 is really the most competent dac schiit makes.



Maybe that's y I own a Qutest and not Yggy. In any case, measurements mean nothing to me, since I do enjoy how the Yggy sounds


----------



## odessamarin (Apr 18, 2019)

apart of measurement which i am personally don't care, more important how it's sound .. if one really can do A/B between Yggy and Qutest. I have strong feeling which will rest at the end! 


I have fun doing this A/B.. last days. To be short.. yggy not going anywhere from my set in the near future!
Sure, it so hard to stop listening to each of this DAC. But the level of price-tag where Yggy can compete is very respectful. Qutest was go away after 1,5 week, probably not my taste.


----------



## OctavianH (Apr 18, 2019)

I would say let's not jump in the truck of "mine is the best, crappy are the rest" because it is not a proper way to judge. I am sure both are great DACs for the price and Qutest is one of the best offerings of the hi-fi market in the latest years. And it is very scalable when improving cables and power supply. More than this, it pairs well with a lot of amplifiers and this is a very important thing. To bring a proof of what I say I will show you that I paired it successfully with both a tube and a SS amp and both sound great:






A2 has a great feature of Output being hard-wired with Input 1, this means a passive link, even if A2 is unplugged the Output can be used so I have cascaded my tube amp on it.
After some hours of interconnect matching, because I needed 2 RCA-RCA cables and pairing was not so simple to obtain the sound I am used to and I like, I can say I have both amps sounding fabulous. So Qutest is a DAC which can be used with almost everything and provides outstanding results. But big improvements were obtained by a linear power supply, interconnect cables and also power conditioning the amps. The weakest link in my chain remains the USB inpus which, honestly, is not on the same level as optical, but the root cause is the PC which is used as a source and it is very noisy. So I am using an ISO Regen for it, which unfortunately has other problems like it is not seen by the PC from time to time. I hope soon I'll try a iUSB3.0 and this weakness will disappear. In conclusion, what someone said about pairing of Qutest with almost eveything was definitely true.


----------



## jbarrentine

It helps that qutest isn't as big as an engine block too.


----------



## odessamarin

jbarrentine said:


> It helps that qutest isn't as big as an engine block too.



this is so true!.. and don't need to be ON 24/7 to sound good


----------



## Joe-Siow

jbarrentine said:


> Schiit got away for a very long time making JUNK they weren't even measuring. What we learned was that distortion is pleasing in a way to a lot of people.
> 
> But it doesn't sound better than competent design.



I have only 1 question

Have you actually listened to the Yggy with your ears?


----------



## odessamarin

Listening?! what for... if measurement exists ))))


----------



## Light - Man

odessamarin said:


> Listening?! *what for*... if measurement exists ))))



For your ears, what else are we *hear* for! 

I have not heard either, as I live in a new World of portable audio bliss!


----------



## OctavianH

I would say the best DAC is the most resolving and neutral. For flavour you have amps to connect.


----------



## Joe-Siow

OctavianH said:


> I would say the best DAC is the most resolving and neutral. For flavour you have amps to connect.



Normally that's the maxim to follow
However every now and then there will exceptions
That exception for me is Lampizator


----------



## jbarrentine

Joe-Siow said:


> I have only 1 question
> 
> Have you actually listened to the Yggy with your ears?



I don't have to listen to it to know it's crap. I had a mimby. Thought it sounded very good. Then I got a "lower end" modi 3 to use in another part of the house. This "lower end" part which was (finally) competently designed absolutely destroyed mimby judged by my own ears. I wondered how it could be so good, then read the thread and realized what Schiit has been pulling for years: design by incompetence. Design without an actual basis for performance. Hell, people like tube amps. I even like tube amps here and there, but I'm not going to pretend they are OBJECTIVELY good performers.


----------



## Chop-Top

Joe-Siow said:


> I have only 1 question
> 
> Have you actually listened to the Yggy with your ears?


I heard a Yggy Raggy stack at a headphone meet last year and was unimpressed. Sounded horribly veiled and bloated.


----------



## odessamarin

jbarrentine said:


> I don't have to listen to it to know it's crap.





Chop-Top said:


> Sounded horribly veiled and bloated.



you guys just haters... no more comments. wish you all the best.


----------



## Chop-Top (Apr 18, 2019)

odessamarin said:


> you guys just haters... no more comments. wish you all the best.


Hey, I'm not a hater just stating my opinion after listening to the Yggy.  Love my Chord Qutest!
BTW, I had not heard a Chord product prior to the Yggy audition.


----------



## Gibson59 (Apr 18, 2019)

Man I feel bad cuz I thing I started the Yggy vs Qutest convo a couple pages back. I didn’t say Yggy sucks by any means, I simply meant to say that IMO Qutest is right up there with it, which is high praise because Yggy is so good. I just tend to prefer the sound of Qutest in my system.


----------



## Clemmaster

jbarrentine said:


> Except Yggdrasil apparently measures like complete junk (****. let's say it)



When measured by incompetent wanna-be "engineer" with shady agenda, probably.


----------



## jbarrentine (Apr 18, 2019)

odessamarin said:


> you guys just haters... no more comments. wish you all the best.



People at Schiit literally plainly stated they had never measured dacs before the Modi 3. Say "hater" all you want. It came right out of their mouths. All ASR did was call attention to that fact.

I want a well engineered product. Hence, the Qutest. I believe most people who buy something that expensive want it well engineered too.


----------



## betula

Since I bought a Mojo for portable use (again) I had a chance to compare it to the Qutest as a DAC. I also compared them to the built in DAC in the Questyle CMA600i.

How some people can't hear differences between DACs is a mystery to me. 
600i DAC is the poorest out of the three which is not a surprise, but actually it is not too far behind Mojo, just different. Mojo is still better overall, no doubt about it.
600i DAC sounds a bit thicker, especially at the low-end but it is also more flat and 2 dimensional. Mojo has better soundstage depth and a thinner but more realistic sound. The low end is cleaner but also leaner in comparison. I would much prefer the Mojo as a DAC but I can see some people being happy with the 600i's built in DAC.

Qutest to my ears is another world to both. Another world to Mojo too. Qutest sounds so much fuller and more satisfying. More details are coming through but in a completely effortless way. The sound has a full body, much better extension than Mojo. Absolutely awesome low-end reproduction. No contest. 

I already knew this and tested about a year ago, but it is good to refresh those memories every now and then.


----------



## Staxaphone

As an owner of the 600i I concur with your opinion that the DAC in the Questyle is not equal to other DACs in performance.  On the other hand the current mode design of the 600i headphone amp is spectacular IMO.  That’s why I still have it and am very satisfied with it.  I have used several other DACs feeding the 600i amp but have found none better that the Qutest to date.  No other DAC has come close to Qutest with regard to PCM sound enjoyment.  Only a Simaudio DAC has been about its equal but only with SACD quality DSF and ISO files.  Not even close with PCM.  Is anybody else using a current mode headphone amplifier that they like?


----------



## betula

Staxaphone said:


> As an owner of the 600i I concur with your opinion that the DAC in the Questyle is not equal to other DACs in performance.  On the other hand the current mode design of the 600i headphone amp is spectacular IMO.  That’s why I still have it and am very satisfied with it.  I have used several other DACs feeding the 600i amp but have found none better that the Qutest to date.  No other DAC has come close to Qutest with regard to PCM sound enjoyment.  Only a Simaudio DAC has been about its equal but only with SACD quality DSF and ISO files.  Not even close with PCM.  Is anybody else using a current mode headphone amplifier that they like?


I find your post a bit confusing.

I wasn't talking about 'other DACs' I was only talking about Mojo and Qutest.

Current mode design has nothing to do with the DAC. That's the amp section.

I also haven't found better DAC than the Qutest yet, hence my post.

I like the current mode 600i as an amp a lot.

First you say the 600i's DAC is not inferior to other DACs, than you say you haven't found better than Qutest. So first you disagree with me and then agree...


----------



## Staxaphone

betula said:


> I find your post a bit confusing.
> 
> I wasn't talking about 'other DACs' I was only talking about Mojo and Qutest.
> 
> ...


----------



## Staxaphone

I stated “the Questyle is not equal to other DACs in performance”.  This normally means it is not as good as.  Your confusion is confusing.


----------



## Staxaphone

To rephrase for you:

The Questyle current mode amplification is great

The Questyle DAC is not very good

The Simaudio DAC DSD performance was about same as Qutest

Qutest PCM performance is best of all DACs I have used


----------



## Jon L (Apr 18, 2019)

OctavianH said:


> Speaking of cables and USB cables in particular, I wonder if anyone using a PC as a source tried to use a PCI-ex USB3.0 card instead of a normal USB3.0 port on the motherboard to connect the Qutest. I mean, all try to filter and reclock using different devices, but it would be good to know if a dedicated USB card makes a difference.



I own/use PCI-express USB3.0 cards from SOtM and JCAT, and yes they do sound different than Mobo's USB and from each other.  PCI-ex cards do sound cleaner, denser, richer, even compared to my Mobo, which is purpose-built already powered by outboard linear PS, OS on M-SATA card, etc. 

On a side note, for those who use Foobar and Qutest, and do not plan to splurge on M-scaler, do try the Foobar Resampler-V plugin for 44.1kHz material.
I usually do not like resamplers, having tried and compared PPHS, SSRC, SRC extensively.  Resampler-V lets you customize SSRC and SoX with various adjustments to arrive at a sound "effect" to your tastes.  I still do not like how high sample rates sound (192 kHz, etc), but at 96 kHz and settings to extend LPF frequency response and still keep impulse response around 1 ms, I am able to simulate a certain "wetness" (some report Qutest sound as "dry") and immediacy while sanding off a a trace of 44.1kHz "edge." The settings will depend on your system and tastes, but for my main speaker system, something like this works...




0416192016 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## musickid

Just popped in to see what was going on in this thread as a chord owner. It's really go go go here very lively to say the least.


----------



## OctavianH

Jon L said:


> I own/use PCI-express USB3.0 cards from SOtM and JCAT, and yes they do sound different than Mobo's USB and from each other.  PCI-ex cards do sound cleaner, denser, richer, even compared to my Mobo, which is purpose-built already powered by outboard linear PS, OS on M-SATA card, etc.



Many thanks for your advice, the Foobar plugin is new to me and sounds very interesting. What about JCAT and SOtM PCI-USB cards: can you describe the difference? I guess you are powering them externally with the LPS you mention. Do you use also a filter at the "end" of the USB cable before the DAC?


----------



## betula (Apr 19, 2019)

Apologies @Staxaphone it was late night and I misread your post. I am glad we are on the same page.


----------



## Joe-Siow (Apr 19, 2019)

jbarrentine said:


> I don't have to listen to it to know it's crap.



Thanks for proving my point so beautifully. LOL




Chop-Top said:


> I heard a Yggy Raggy stack at a headphone meet last year and was unimpressed. Sounded horribly veiled and bloated.



I appreciate replies like this. At least an opinion is formed after you tried the equipment. I respect your opinion, as opposed to trolls who just know


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Yggy was one of options, when I was looking for a new DAC. I would not say it sounds worse or better than Qutest. My impression was that those two are comparable, although Chord sound signature is closer to my taste. But apart from this Qutest have support for DXD and DSD (I have both types in my library and love how it sounds), Qutest takes less space on my table and it was 1.000 EUR cheaper than Yggy. Considering all this, I can say that for me Chord Qutest is much better DAC than Schiit Yggy. And that`s why I bought it.


----------



## jbarrentine

Joe-Siow said:


> Thanks for proving my point so beautifully. LOL
> 
> I appreciate replies like this. At least an opinion is formed after you tried the equipment. I respect your opinion, as opposed to trolls who just know



If I go looking to buy a ferrari I'm not going to fool myself into believing a gremlin is fine.


----------



## supabayes

Interesting to read opinion of Yggy vs Qutest. I own both. The Yggy is a very good dac and packed with both XLR and dual RCA outputs. The Qutest has only one set of RCA. I enjoyed using the Yggy to compare AB between two amps connected toYggy by RCA. I cannot do this even with my Dave.


----------



## supabayes

Chop-Top said:


> I heard a Yggy Raggy stack at a headphone meet last year and was unimpressed. Sounded horribly veiled and bloated.


I own the Yggy Rag stack, which headphone did you usewith the Schiit that you found to be veiled and bloated?


----------



## odessamarin

supabayes said:


> Interesting to read opinion of Yggy vs Qutest. I own both. The Yggy is a very good dac and packed with both XLR and dual RCA outputs. The Qutest has only one set of RCA. I enjoyed using the Yggy to compare AB between two amps connected toYggy by RCA. I cannot do this even with my Dave.



..why not Dave?! the same xlr and RCA there  don't get you.


----------



## supabayes

Maybe you don’t because I am comparing 2 amps with RCA inputs. It is possible to use an interconnect with XLR at DAVE and RCA connectors at amp side. I don’t own such an interconnect. Even if I own one, I don’t like that the XLR output voltage is double that of RCA when DAVE is in DAC mode. Crazy set up for AB comparison of amps.


----------



## odessamarin (Apr 19, 2019)

.. I see.. dual rca! from yggy.


----------



## Chop-Top (Apr 19, 2019)

supabayes said:


> I own the Yggy Rag stack, which headphone did you usewith the Schiit that you found to be veiled and bloated?


2nd to possibly or top tier audeze.  I can't recall exactly. will go back and look at the photos.


----------



## HumanMedia

Jon L said:


> On a side note, for those who use Foobar and Qutest, and do not plan to splurge on M-scaler, do try the Foobar Resampler-V plugin for 44.1kHz material.
> I usually do not like resamplers, having tried and compared PPHS, SSRC, SRC extensively.  Resampler-V lets you customize SSRC and SoX with various adjustments to arrive at a sound "effect" to your tastes.  I still do not like how high sample rates sound (192 kHz, etc), but at 96 kHz and settings to extend LPF frequency response and still keep impulse response around 1 ms, I am able to simulate a certain "wetness" (some report Qutest sound as "dry") and immediacy while sanding off a a trace of 44.1kHz "edge." The settings will depend on your system and tastes, but for my main speaker system, something like this works...



Thanks for this. I use something similar. I use the LMS Server with an ultraRendu as an endpoint/player. There is a free plug-in for the LMS server called C-3PO that does something similar. I use it to do a high quality upscale PCM to 704 and 768 kHz and downres DSD to 704 before being sent to my player as PCM then on to the Qutest. It’s basically a poor mans MScaler and whilst I’m sure it doesn’t compare, I prefer it to the sound to sending the Qutest native res.


----------



## jbarrentine (Apr 23, 2019)

Palladio:   about 2:08 is that someone tapping on a wine glass on the right side? Or whatever instrument would make that effect. Sounds like glass to me. 

I don't know if it's the new headphones, the new cable, or what, but I've never heard that before now. Mind blown.


----------



## HumanMedia (Apr 24, 2019)

HumanMedia said:


> Thanks for this. I use something similar. I use the LMS Server with an ultraRendu as an endpoint/player. There is a free plug-in for the LMS server called C-3PO that does something similar. I use it to do a high quality upscale PCM to 704 and 768 kHz and downres DSD to 704 before being sent to my player as PCM then on to the Qutest. It’s basically a poor mans MScaler and whilst I’m sure it doesn’t compare, I prefer it to the sound to sending the Qutest native res.



Finally got to hear an M Scaler feeding the Qutest.

Really nice. If you like the Qutest sound it’s more of the same, with more textured highs, better bass, and wonderful liquid reverb through the midrange.
You can hear more in a track without having to turn it up.
My piddly server based upscaling as described above was ok, but the M Scaler is a whole different thing.
It didn’t sound immediately better though and it had a hard pushed midrange until I plugged it into the same power board as the qutest. Not sure why it didn’t like being on a different wall plug, but it all came together when on the same board.

Now it’s gone, It’s not the same without the M Scaler.


----------



## Jon L

As they say... If you can't/don't want to afford something, don't ever listen to it.


----------



## Deftone

Jon L said:


> As they say... If you can't/don't want to afford something, don't ever listen to it.



Or ignorance is bliss, but of course we all suffer from the itch that is "can it really get better than this".


----------



## hornytoad

Ragnar-BY said:


> Yggy was one of options, when I was looking for a new DAC. I would not say it sounds worse or better than Qutest. My impression was that those two are comparable, although Chord sound signature is closer to my taste. But apart from this Qutest have support for DXD and DSD (I have both types in my library and love how it sounds), Qutest takes less space on my table and it was 1.000 EUR cheaper than Yggy. Considering all this, I can say that for me Chord Qutest is much better DAC than Schiit Yggy. And that`s why I bought it.


I own both the Yggy and Qutest and I like both. The Yggy has better bass IMO while the Qutest seems more resolving and has better treble. 

They are both excellant in their own way. The Qutest is certainly a lot better than the 2qute I had which I felt was beaten easily by the Yggy.


----------



## Gibson59

hornytoad said:


> I own both the Yggy and Qutest and I like both. The Yggy has better bass IMO while the Qutest seems more resolving and has better treble.
> 
> They are both excellant in their own way. The Qutest is certainly a lot better than the 2qute I had which I felt was beaten easily by the Yggy.



Great info. Could you elaborate a bit on the difference in bass response between the two... why is Yggy better in your opinion?


----------



## odessamarin

@hornytoad
... and I am pretty sure Yggy has much better 3d imaging. More depth soundstage representation as well 
About bass. Yes its just full from Yggy. more deep and wide.. very well extended and defined at the same time. Very good dac. Also decide to keep it for a while.


----------



## hornytoad

Gibson59 said:


> Great info. Could you elaborate a bit on the difference in bass response between the two... why is Yggy better in your opinion?


I just felt the Yggy has  better bass response and is a little fuller but not bloated. The Qutest has that airy treble that I like a lot. 

Pairing with amps, preamps and speakers of course can change all of this to a certain extent.


----------



## hornytoad

odessamarin said:


> @hornytoad
> ... and I am pretty sure Yggy has much better 3d imaging. More depth soundstage representation as well
> About bass. Yes its just full from Yggy. more deep and wide.. very well extended and defined at the same time. Very good dac. Also decide to keep it for a while.


I would tend to agree with the better soundstage with the Yggy. 

Detail oriented folks I feel would prefer the Qutest.


----------



## odessamarin

hornytoad said:


> Detail oriented folks I feel would prefer the Qutest.



Very true.


----------



## Gibson59

hornytoad said:


> I would tend to agree with the better soundstage with the Yggy.
> 
> Detail oriented folks I feel would prefer the Qutest.



Man I adore the soundstage width and depth with the Qutest as well as imaging... if the Yggy is has better soundstage it must be absolutely amazing. I spent time with Yggy, enough to know the Qutest is in the same class, but I’ve never owned a Yggy. I’ll need to get my hands on one soon just for fun to have a longer proper comparison to Qutest.


----------



## hornytoad

Gibson59 said:


> Man I adore the soundstage width and depth with the Qutest as well as imaging... if the Yggy is has better soundstage it must be absolutely amazing. I spent time with Yggy, enough to know the Qutest is in the same class, but I’ve never owned a Yggy. I’ll need to get my hands on one soon just for fun to have a longer proper comparison to Qutest.


They are both terrific . Neither are leaving my house and yes Qutest has excellent soundstage , etc .


----------



## Joe-Siow

HumanMedia said:


> Finally got to hear an M Scaler feeding the Qutest.
> 
> Really nice. If you like the Qutest sound it’s more of the same, with more textured highs, better bass, and wonderful liquid reverb through the midrange.
> You can hear more in a track without having to turn it up.
> ...



That mirrors my thoughts on the M Scaler

Once you plugged it in, it take you a while to adjust, but everything improves, albeit not day and night immediately on the ears
You listen to it for a couple of days, and once you remove it from the setup, that is where it hits you like a sledgehammer
The realization of how much it brings to the table hit you, followed by the horror it also brings to the decimation of the bank account


----------



## turbomustang84

What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?


----------



## Nautrachkfriend

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?


Check out our signatures!


----------



## Deftone

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?



Topping NX1


----------



## OctavianH

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?



With 2 amps actually in the same time:

1) Solid State: Beyerdynamic A2
2) Tube: Feliks Audio Elise MK2

Because A2 has a great feature of Input 1 is hard looped to Output and works even if A2 is turned off, I "cascaded" both amps and I listen to each one depending on mood, to both or even to 3 headphones at the same time. What else can you dream of? And yes, Qutest is making them sound great.


----------



## betula

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?


Auralic Taurus MKII. High power, high resolution, very spacious with excellent depth, very transparent. Doing all of this without being cold or boring. Completely allows Qutest's brilliance to shine through.


----------



## Nik74

OctavianH said:


> With 2 amps actually in the same time:
> 
> 1) Solid State: Beyerdynamic A2
> 2) Tube: Feliks Audio Elise MK2
> ...



That sounds like a great idea! Are you noticing no effect on sq when you have both on at same time ?

My Icon has a loop out that works even when it is off but I never tried to use it. 
So if I m getting this right you re taking the signal from Qutest in to the line in of your amo and then connecting the loop out to the second amp ?


----------



## Nik74

And to the original question, I add a bit of extra “magic” to my Qutest with  valves all the way , Icon Audio HP8 and Luxman SQ-N100 whose headphone out sounds absolutely brilliant with my Sennheisers!


----------



## Nik74

And to the original question, I add a bit of extra “magic” to my Qutest with  valves all the way , Icon Audio HP8 and Luxman SQ-N100 whose headphone out drives  my Sennheisers stunningly!


----------



## Joe-Siow

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?



Using a Leben CS300XS with the Qutest
An unapologetically musical pairing; beautiful vocals yet so so clear sounding


----------



## OctavianH

Nik74 said:


> That sounds like a great idea! Are you noticing no effect on sq when you have both on at same time ?
> 
> My Icon has a loop out that works even when it is off but I never tried to use it.
> So if I m getting this right you re taking the signal from Qutest in to the line in of your amo and then connecting the loop out to the second amp ?



Yes, the output of the Qutest goes to Input 1 of A2 and the output of A2 to the Input of Elise. I have not observed any sound degradation. The loop works even if A2 is unplugged from AC.


----------



## jbarrentine

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?



A simple JDS Labs Atom. I have a THX 789 on order. Honestly the Atom is pretty spectacular.


----------



## Baten

jbarrentine said:


> A simple JDS Labs Atom. I have a THX 789 on order. Honestly the Atom is pretty spectacular.


It sure is


----------



## snatex

turbomustang84 said:


> What Headphone Amplifier are you guys using with the Qutest ?



Violectric V280  - I am very happy with this pairing.


----------



## kumar402

Lyr 3 or LP
THX AAA789 will be delivered in May


----------



## Baten

kumar402 said:


> Lyr 3 or LP
> THX AAA789 will be delivered in May


LP is objectively the better one of both. Also Lyr has some freak occurrences of frying headphones, I'd err on the side of caution


----------



## Staxaphone

betula said:


> Auralic Taurus MKII. High power, high resolution, very spacious with excellent depth, very transparent. Doing all of this without being cold or boring. Completely allows Qutest's brilliance to shine through.



That Taurus is a great looking amp.  I am using my Qutest with the Questyle 600i which you too have had.  How would you compare the sound from the two headphone amps?  Thanks!


----------



## betula

Staxaphone said:


> That Taurus is a great looking amp.  I am using my Qutest with the Questyle 600i which you too have had.  How would you compare the sound from the two headphone amps?  Thanks!


The 600i is a great amp for the price when used in balanced mode, but compared to the Taurus MKII it is not a contest. The Taurus has much more energy, it is cleaner, tighter, much more spacious and more detailed. The 600i sounds hazy and two dimensional in comparison especially in the bass and treble region. The bass control the Taurus offers leaves the 600i in the dust.
I do prefer the 600i to some other amps like the LP or even the Pro iCan but the Taurus for me is next level and pretty much end-game performance in solid state amps.


----------



## Staxaphone

betula said:


> The 600i is a great amp for the price when used in balanced mode, but compared to the Taurus MKII it is not a contest. The Taurus has much more energy, it is cleaner, tighter, much more spacious and more detailed. The 600i sounds hazy and two dimensional in comparison especially in the bass and treble region. The bass control the Taurus offers leaves the 600i in the dust.
> I do prefer the 600i to some other amps like the LP or even the Pro iCan but the Taurus for me is next level and pretty much end-game performance in solid state amps.



Thanks for the feedback.  I might just try the Taurus based on your impressions/comparison.  I too had the iCan pro for a while but felt that it was much too analytical and sharp for my tastes.  But I am also beginning to look for some tube headphone amps for mating with the Qutest.  I had the Woo WA22 for many years and liked its euphonic presentation a lot, especially on string/piano recordings..  But mine always had a very low transformer hum that Woo investigated in shop and said was within spec and normal.  So that sort of aggravated me and I sold it.  I don't believe they were totally upfront with me as i purchased a used GES for my Stax 009s that also had a persistant hum issue.  I sent it back to Woo and they replaced an IC board which they said had a crack in it.  It came back DEAD quiet and has been so ever since.  So I am gun shy of tube units with transformers as IMO it's a crap shoot on inherent noise level no matter what the mfg. says.  But if a SS amp like the Taurus (or maybe the Pass Labs HPA-1) can improvement enjoyment of the Qutest I will probably go for it.  Thanks again.


----------



## betula (Apr 26, 2019)

Staxaphone said:


> Thanks for the feedback.  I might just try the Taurus based on your impressions/comparison.  I too had the iCan pro for a while but felt that it was much too analytical and sharp for my tastes.  But I am also beginning to look for some tube headphone amps for mating with the Qutest.  I had the Woo WA22 for many years and liked its euphonic presentation a lot, especially on string/piano recordings..  But mine always had a very low transformer hum that Woo investigated in shop and said was within spec and normal.  So that sort of aggravated me and I sold it.  I don't believe they were totally upfront with me as i purchased a used GES for my Stax 009s that also had a persistant hum issue.  I sent it back to Woo and they replaced an IC board which they said had a crack in it.  It came back DEAD quiet and has been so ever since.  So I am gun shy of tube units with transformers as IMO it's a crap shoot on inherent noise level no matter what the mfg. says.  But if a SS amp like the Taurus (or maybe the Pass Labs HPA-1) can improvement enjoyment of the Qutest I will probably go for it.  Thanks again.


I think it all comes down to preferred sound signature and the genre of music one listens to. I listen to a lot of electronic ambient where clarity, 3D spaciousness and bass layering/control are essential. If someone mostly listens to acoustic instruments, then it might be better to go with some more 'romantic' tube sound. Tube amps can be more noisy though than SS amps, so you have to choose carefully. I am not that interested in tubes atm partly for the above mentioned preference reasons, and partly because I have got no time/budget for tube rolling which is pretty much unavoidable if you go down the tube way.
With my music and my sonic preferences I am very happy with my choice at the moment. I am also enjoying the pitch black background of the Taurus. I also found the Pro iCan too analytical and a bit soul-less tbh. Even though in technicalities it is better than the 600i. I find the Taurus to be an improved version of the 600i.
(The Pass Labs amp looks lovely, if you can afford it.)


----------



## turbomustang84

snatex said:


> Violectric V280  - I am very happy with this pairing.


When using the Qutest how do you hook it up ?
Does it allow you to use the balanced Xlr Headphone output with  unbalanced input ?


----------



## Roybenz

I use the moon 430had with qutest. I think its amazing. A Little warmth from the moon and lcd 4 sound makes it amazing.


----------



## snatex

turbomustang84 said:


> When using the Qutest how do you hook it up ?
> Does it allow you to use the balanced Xlr Headphone output with  unbalanced input ?



Yes. I am using the balanced XLR output. The V280 outputs a fully balanced signal regardless of the input.


----------



## Qute Beats

After messing with USB from laptop now running optical from Intel NUC.  The NUC is completely silent running (Celeron processor, low power so doesn't need fans) and to my ears sounds better than the laptop via USB.


----------



## GradoSound

Qute Beats said:


> After messing with USB from laptop now running optical from Intel NUC.  The NUC is completely silent running (Celeron processor, low power so doesn't need fans) and to my ears sounds better than the laptop via USB.



Likewise. I was using MicroRendu USB out and I decided to try out my second system's Cambridge Audio CXN v2 network player's optical out. I normally use CXN as a Transport+DAC+PreAmp to a Rotel power amp.

My expectation was minimal change (if any at all) but, to my big surprise, CXN sounded more detailed; specifically highs and lows were better defined. MicroRendu over USB sounded warmer and lost some detail in comparison.My first thought was a volumes mismatch. When I checked they turned out to be the same. 

Interesting!

PS.   Tidal --> Ethernet --> CXN --> optical --> Qutest


----------



## Qute Beats (Apr 28, 2019)

GradoSound said:


> Likewise. I was using MicroRendu USB out and I decided to try out my second system's Cambridge Audio CXN v2 network player's optical out. I normally use CXN as a Transport+DAC+PreAmp to a Rotel power amp.
> 
> My expectation was minimal change (if any at all) but, to my big surprise, CXN sounded more detailed; specifically highs and lows were better defined. MicroRendu over USB sounded warmer and lost some detail in comparison.My first thought was a volumes mismatch. When I checked they turned out to be the same.
> 
> ...


I plugged USB cable into the NUC, maybe better than from laptop due to quieter environment inside (no moving parts, SSHD) but still think optical sounds better.  Laptop has no optical out.  NUC is just a music server, no other software installed except Musicbee and all Microsoft Win10 bloatware removed as well as all disabling all unnecessary services,so as light as possible.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Very interesting observations on the optical input
I have an Opus #1 lying around with my Lifatec glass optical cable. Maybe I should plug them in and do an AB against USB to see what my ears tell me


----------



## FredQc (Apr 29, 2019)

To me,  Lifatec glass out of the Bluesound Node2i + Roon sounds better than Audioquest Carbon out of the SoTM sMS-200ultra + sP-500 + Roon to the Qutest ...


----------



## jbarrentine

+1 on the lifatec glass. Went to it a week or two ago.


----------



## snatex (Apr 29, 2019)

I switched to Lifatec glass optical last week too.


----------



## dac64

Mine is 2m lifatech


----------



## x RELIC x

An alternative is the multi microscopic strand plastic optical cables from Sysconcept. They withstand extreme bends, unlike glass, and they have incredible throughput.


----------



## jwbrent (Apr 29, 2019)

The Lifatech toslink is a great optical cable with good customer support, I’ve owned two different versions. The only issue I had is it won’t pass 24/192 or DSD 64. For that, I had to use a Sys Concept toslink.


----------



## Joe-Siow

x RELIC x said:


> An alternative is the multi microscopic strand plastic optical cables from Sysconcept. They withstand extreme bends, unlike glass, and they have incredible throughput.



I had the opportunity to try both some years ago. The Lifatech is significantly superior in all aspects, but yes, due to its glass construction, the Sysconcept is a more practical option


----------



## Deftone

This is a good cable for people in the UK https://www.qed.co.uk/cables/hdmi-digital/qed-reference-optical-quartz-digital-audio-cable.html#tab1

A few chord owners using this here including myself. I decided to purchase one after my cheap and cheerful kabeldirekt optical was loosing connection and making popping sounds regularly.


----------



## x RELIC x (Apr 29, 2019)

Joe-Siow said:


> I had the opportunity to try both some years ago. The Lifatech is significantly superior in all aspects, but yes, due to its glass construction, the Sysconcept is a more practical option



You mean audibly superior? If you say so. I was offering an alternative as the OP asked for suggestions. I’ve been very happy with the Sysconcept. Not trying to start a debate between glass and plastic.


----------



## Joe-Siow

x RELIC x said:


> You mean audibly superior? If you say so. I was offering an alternative as the OP asked for suggestions. I’ve been very happy with the Sysconcept. Not trying to start a debate between glass and plastic.



Yup, I meant audibly superior. No worries on the debate, I'm not starting anything either. Just stating my personal observation having heard both. Different people have different needs, some want the ultimate sound quality while others are prepared to settle balance of sound quality and durability, etc.


----------



## miketlse

jbarrentine said:


> Palladio:   about 2:08 is that someone tapping on a wine glass on the right side? Or whatever instrument would make that effect. Sounds like glass to me.
> 
> I don't know if it's the new headphones, the new cable, or what, but I've never heard that before now. Mind blown.



To me it sounds like someone gently striking a triangle.


----------



## hikaru12

T Bone said:


> I'm conducting a bit of an experiment tonight.  I'm comparing my new Chord Qutest to my "old" Holo Spring DAC.  I've got my system configured in such a way (albeit temporarily) to quickly A:B both DAC's on the same amp.
> For this test, I'm using a HeadAmp GS-X mk2 headphone amplifier to drive my Focal Utopia's.  I have my Chord Qutest plugged into my desktop PC via a Curious USB cable.  The Holo Spring is being fed by a Mano Ultra streamer.  I am using ROON to stream the same album track to both DACs.    .....it's not the most scientific setup, but I've gotten some very interesting results to share.
> 
> (1) The differences between the Holo Spring and the Qutest aren't as wide as I would have imagined.  The Holo still punches above its weight class.
> ...



Did you ever find the pairing of the Qutest and MK2 bright? The reason I ask is because the Qutest is neutral/bright while I've heard the MK2 is bright on it's own so that really sounds fatiguing. I'm looking to get its smaller brother the MK2 Mini but waiting for impressions as it has not been released yet.


----------



## JM1979

As a long time Hugo 2 owner, I've made an somewhat unintentional transition to a full time desktop set up and a separate mobile setup (iems, DFR).  As I've made this change, the Hugo 2 has been mildly frustrating as the desktop mode and placements of inputs/outputs isn't ideal.  Although I don't fault chord for this as Hugo 2 is a powerhouse that is very flexible, this just comes down to my personal use case.  I've always loved Chord DACs (owned Hugo 2, Mojo and listened to Dave many times).  The love of Chord DACs and desire for a more desktop suitable set up lead me to Qutest.  I figured I'd basically being getting a Hugo 2 with a better form factor for desktop use and that would have been fine with me.  I picked up my Qutest today, and my initial impressions have blown me away.  Some of my thoughts:

-Hugo 2 is amazing when used with the headphone amp.  
-In comparing the Qutest, there is a significant different in Qutest->Headphone Amp (Liquid Platinum) and Hugo 2 (line level out) -> Liquid Platinum
-I haven't played around with the Qutest variable output yet.  I'm assuming the initial set up is 2V output, and that is what my impressions are made from
-Several additional variables changes in my Hugo 2 for Qutest swap: Source USB chord (USB B connect versus USB Micro connect).  Stock power supply of Qutest versus stock power supply of Hugo 2.  Meenova Lightening to USB micro vs. Qutest Stock USB A to ASB B cord.  
-Qutest is significantly smoother in sound quality, and the sound has a more solid/grounded/heavy feel.  I loved Hugo 2's details; those are still there with Qutest, but everything sounds more musical.  
-Clarity, transparency is identical
-I have a lot more play in my amp (Liquid Platinum) volume knob.   I like this, as Hugo 2 didn't give me as much variation.  However, perhaps I haven't set the Qutest to the right output stage yet or perhapds Hugo 2 RCA output setting is higher than Qutest.  Regardless, the difference with Qutest is meaningful and positive. 
-I would never critique the Hugo 2 for this, but listening to the Qutest brought it out: The smoothness of the Qutest could be do to the loss of some potentially overly crisp treble in Hugo 2.  Hugo 2 was never piercing, but in listening to Qutest, the smoothness is undeniable.  
-Qutest brings an even more realistic presentation to live recordings.  I listen to a lot of recorded live music and the difference in Qutest and Hugo 2 is pretty distinct.  

I was never unhappy with Hugo 2, and still think it's one od the best DACs around, and the best DAC/Amp around; However for my set up Qutest is already paying dividends.  I was not expecting such a significant improvement in sound.  I basically wanted a desktop only Hugo 2.


----------



## JM1979

One more thought - for whatever reason, the Qutest is a little more forgiving on 16/44 kHz recordings in a good way.


----------



## Deftone

@JM1979  I wonder if this is due to the Qutest having the same output stage as Mojo.


----------



## Qute Beats

Joe-Siow said:


> Yup, I meant audibly superior. No worries on the debate, I'm not starting anything either. Just stating my personal observation having heard both. Different people have different needs, some want the ultimate sound quality while others are prepared to settle balance of sound quality and durability, etc.


Interesting, I thought Toslink cables were basically all the same in terms of SQ as pure digital.  I've just ordered a new one, but just because I was using an adaptor on the end so it fit the smaller (headphone size) socket.  Price was £2.50..  If SQ gains are truly achieved I will look to upgrade in future.


----------



## JM1979

Listening to Qutest more and am in full mouth on the floor enjoyment. It’s subtle but for a desktop set up, it crushes Hugo 2. I was not expecting this at all. 


I was already planning on an M Scaler purchase later this year. Might need to sell some organs to escalate that purchase time frame.


----------



## hornytoad

JM1979 said:


> Listening to Qutest more and am in full mouth on the floor enjoyment. It’s subtle but for a desktop set up, it crushes Hugo 2. I was not expecting this at all.
> 
> 
> I was already planning on an M Scaler purchase later this year. Might need to sell some organs to escalate that purchase time frame.


Give it some more time, it will get better.


----------



## Qute Beats

JM1979 said:


> Listening to Qutest more and am in full mouth on the floor enjoyment. It’s subtle but for a desktop set up, it crushes Hugo 2. I was not expecting this at all.
> 
> 
> I was already planning on an M Scaler purchase later this year. Might need to sell some organs to escalate that purchase time frame.


I recently got the chance to listen and compare Hugo TT2/M-Scaler to Qutest for a weekend, so got in some serious listening time.  That combo rocks no question, detail retrial is superb and the music simply flows so well, if money were easy to come by then no hesitation in buying them.  Also tried the M-scaler into Qutest, yes benefits were there, but less pronounced I thought without the TT there.  Now of course a lot depends on the amp and 'phones you have to compare, the TT amp is superbly good, better than my Arcam RHead without a doubt (my 'phones are HD650s).  But, and its a big one for me, I was still very happy listening to Qutest via the RHead.  I know I'm missing some of the action, but it's still great and makes me happy!  I now have even more respect for the Qutest, esp. given it's modest price point.  One day I hope to move up, but for now all is good


----------



## Qute Beats

Got some Audioquest Nighthawks on the way at a good 2nd hand price, interested to see how they'll compare to the Hd650s given Rob likes them.


----------



## JM1979

This is a lot of hyperbole and please don’t take my opinion in making a buying decision, but wow the Qutest smokes Hugo 2. I’m blown away.


----------



## Gibson59

JM1979 said:


> This is a lot of hyperbole and please don’t take my opinion in making a buying decision, but wow the Qutest smokes Hugo 2. I’m blown away.



I had the same findings when I spent significant time demoing them against each other on two separate occasions. I may not say it “smoked” Hugo 2 but I strongly preferred it.


----------



## betula

JM1979 said:


> This is a lot of hyperbole and please don’t take my opinion in making a buying decision, but wow the Qutest smokes Hugo 2. I’m blown away.


I also had a LP with the Qutest for a short time, it is a great sound but I personally prefer other amps with my Qutest. 
A couple of years ago I tried Hugo2 too, but I had different hps back then. 
I know, there is a big debate between two groups whether you need an external amp with the Hugo2 or the sound straight out of Hugo2 is superior to any amp connected. 
I am very happy with my present combo (Qutest+Taurus MKII) but I am wondering how the Hugo2 alone would compare. I keep getting totally controversial opinions and advice from the above mentioned two groups and really want to make up my own mind by trying a Hugo2 but it is not easy to get one for a short home audition.

I don't want to trigger the same debate, I am purely interested in your experience and opinion on this matter. If you could briefly touch on the sound differences between Qutest+LP vs Hugo2 alone. 
Many thanks!


----------



## hikaru12

betula said:


> I am very happy with my present combo (Qutest+Taurus MKII)



How do you find this pairing? I'm looking to get the same thing or the GSX Mini but the Taurus is cheaper. It's sligthly warm right, so it goes well with Qutests sometimes bright nature?


----------



## betula

hikaru12 said:


> How do you find this pairing? I'm looking to get the same thing or the GSX Mini but the Taurus is cheaper. It's sligthly warm right, so it goes well with Qutests sometimes bright nature?


The Taurus is pretty neutral with just a tiny hint of warmth to take of the edges.
It is a very powerful, clean, clear and energetic combo. The clarity, 3D spaciousness (depth!) and instrument separation is superb. 
I am also very much enjoying the solid yet clear low-end. 
I was also wondering about the GSX Mini, but had a great deal for a new Taurus. Also heard that the GSX MKII can be a bit bright and I am not a fan of overly bright sound because of my treble sensitivity. The treble on the Taurus is very clean and clear, pretty much the highest level of brightness I can still enjoy. Pairing matters a lot though, I use this combo with Audeze which are perhaps the most recommended headphones with the Taurus.


----------



## hikaru12

betula said:


> The Taurus is pretty neutral with just a tiny hint of warmth to take of the edges.
> It is a very powerful, clean, clear and energetic combo. The clarity, 3D spaciousness (depth!) and instrument separation is superb.
> I am also very much enjoying the solid yet clear low-end.
> I was also wondering about the GSX Mini, but had a great deal for a new Taurus. Also heard that the GSX MKII can be a bit bright and I am not a fan of overly bright sound because of my treble sensitivity. The treble on the Taurus is very clean and clear, pretty much the highest level of brightness I can still enjoy. Pairing matters a lot though, I use this combo with Audeze which are perhaps the most recommended headphones with the Taurus.



That's why I'm still waiting for some impressions as the Mini has yet to be released to see if they've fixed the treble issue. I would be pairing the Qutest with a warmer amp as I'll be pairing it with AFO's which are warm but nowhere near as warm as the 650s, LCD2/3s etc. I'm not very treble sensitive but 6k is my hot spot.


----------



## betula

hikaru12 said:


> That's why I'm still waiting for some impressions as the Mini has yet to be released to see if they've fixed the treble issue. I would be pairing the Qutest with a warmer amp as I'll be pairing it with AFO's which are warm but nowhere near as warm as the 650s, LCD2/3s etc. I'm not very treble sensitive but 6k is my hot spot.


AFO is still pretty warm IMO. I think that would probably work well with the Taurus. If you decide to go for the Mini, make sure you share your impressions.


----------



## hikaru12

betula said:


> AFO is still pretty warm IMO. I think that would probably work well with the Taurus. If you decide to go for the Mini, make sure you share your impressions.



I can get the Taurus for $1k so I might just do that. Thanks for your impressions!


----------



## Gibson59

Anyone have a chance to demo Hugo TT2 against Qutest + Mscaler (and if so, what amp did you use for Qutest)? I assume the latter would “win” but just curious. Talking purely from a sound quality perspective, not taking into account device functionality of TT2 vs Qutest. 

With my current setup of Qutest + Amp I could sell both and get more than half way to the cost of a TT2. However it would be a lot more cash out of pocket to simply keep what I have and add an Mscaler to my chain. This is why I ask if the TT2 alone can compete with Qutest + Mscaler. 

One of these two options is my next step up the ladder.


----------



## betula (May 3, 2019)

Gibson59 said:


> Anyone have a chance to demo Hugo TT2 against Qutest + Mscaler (and if so, what amp did you use for Qutest)? I assume the latter would “win” but just curious. Talking purely from a sound quality perspective, not taking into account device functionality of TT2 vs Qutest.
> 
> With my current setup of Qutest + Amp I could sell both and get more than half way to the cost of a TT2. However it would be a lot more cash out of pocket to simply keep what I have and add an Mscaler to my chain. This is why I ask if the TT2 alone can compete with Qutest + Mscaler.
> 
> One of these two options is my next step up the ladder.


That's an interesting question. These are the two potential routes ahead of me too, in the next year perhaps. I read that Qutest while improves a lot with the MScaler, it can't bring out all the benefits that 1M taps offer. For that you need at least the TT2 or Dave.
Unfortunately I haven't heard the Qutest+MScaler or TT2 alone, but I heard TT2 with MScaler. While it was undeniably the best sound I have ever heard, made me question if I'd ever pay £7500 for it. The sound was delicate, smooth, extremely refined and high resolution, very coherent. The spaciousness was mesmerising and when I say it was highly resolving I am not talking about the usual HD vs 4K resolution in headphones kind of thing but _lifelike_ resolution.

That said, it is a lot of money and I imagine not everyone could appreciate the improvement.
Since like yourself, I am only £1400-1800 away from the TT2 and the MScaler is £3500, upgrading to the TT2 will be the most likely scenario. At some point.
I would highly recommend to audition all options before you pull the trigger.


----------



## STR-1

betula said:


> While it was undeniably the best sound I have ever heard, made me question if I'd ever pay £8500 for it.


TT 2 (£3,995) and M Scaler (£3,495) are only £7,490 at list price.  You might even get them for less if you buy both, and many authorised Chord dealers do very good trade-in deals.


----------



## betula

STR-1 said:


> TT 2 (£3,995) and M Scaler (£3,495) are only £7,490 at list price.  You might even get them for less if you buy both, and many authorised Chord dealers do very good trade-in deals.


My bad. Numbers edited accordingly.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Guys,has anyone tried installing ferrite on the DC power cable?Before the usb input of the power supply?

I don't remember anyone doing so in this thread...I am very curious!


----------



## hikaru12

Has anyone determined what the best source input is for the Qutest? Is it optical or BNC? The reason I'm asking is I'm thinking of upgrading to a Bel Canto E-One in the near future and want to see what connectors I should be getting with my new streamer to make the most use of the DAC.


----------



## Zzt231gr

It has been answered hundreds of times.

Optical,period.


----------



## kumar402

hikaru12 said:


> Has anyone determined what the best source input is for the Qutest? Is it optical or BNC? The reason I'm asking is I'm thinking of upgrading to a Bel Canto E-One in the near future and want to see what connectors I should be getting with my new streamer to make the most use of the DAC.


I guess it all depends on the streamer or source. I think these connection will make minimal impact. I don't see perceiving any difference between optical and BNC as long as source hasn't prioritized  one over another.


----------



## hikaru12

Thanks for the info - only reason I ask is optical has high jitter but isolation from electrical noise and Ive found optical to be subpar on other DACs compared to a direct electrical connection like coax or BNC/AES.


----------



## kumar402 (May 3, 2019)

hikaru12 said:


> Thanks for the info - only reason I ask is optical has high jitter but isolation from electrical noise and Ive found optical to be subpar on other DACs compared to a direct electrical connection like coax or BNC/AES.


Right now I'm using optical but I have invested in Digione signature player and hence will move to BNC. I see you have Gumby and I guess Schiit are proponent of BNC/COAX connection so that's your way forward.

Also I feel BNC implementation in Chord product to be as good as any since that's how their MSCALER connect to their DAC


----------



## Baten

Zzt231gr said:


> It has been answered hundreds of times.
> 
> Optical,period.



coax 4 lyfe


----------



## x RELIC x

To paraphrase the designer, you’d have to transmit the signal down a wet string for jitter to become an issue with Chord DACs. He’s shown that jitter is not an issue at all in his Pulse Array designs.

Optical is the reference.


----------



## Deftone

Wet string lol i like that.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Got my Allo USBridge yesterday. I thought that my MacBook Pro have a good USB output, but USBridge outperformed it in every way. I was surprised how big could be an improvement from digital transport upgrade.


----------



## kumar402

Ragnar-BY said:


> Got my Allo USBridge yesterday. I thought that my MacBook Pro have a good USB output, but USBridge outperformed it in every way. I was surprised how big could be an improvement from digital transport upgrade.


I am waiting for digione signature player as well. Currently I’m using optical out from my 2013Macbook pro. I hope to hear similar improvement.


----------



## miketlse

Ragnar-BY said:


> Got my Allo USBridge yesterday. I thought that my MacBook Pro have a good USB output, but USBridge outperformed it in every way. I was surprised how big could be an improvement from digital transport upgrade.


Are you using one or two power supplies for the USBridge?


----------



## Ragnar-BY

miketlse said:


> Are you using one or two power supplies for the USBridge?


Two. For clean side I use Apple iPhone charger. Apple PSUs produce less noise than cheaper generic switchers and it`s clearly better than powering USBridge from one stock PSU. I have not bought "audiophile LPSU" yet, but it would be interesting to try one.


----------



## miketlse

Ragnar-BY said:


> Two. For clean side I use Apple iPhone charger. Apple PSUs produce less noise than cheaper generic switchers and it`s clearly better than powering USBridge from one stock PSU. I have not bought "audiophile LPSU" yet, but it would be interesting to try one.


I wondered, because there are webpages recommending what you have done, with a low noise PSU for the usb bridge circuits.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

miketlse said:


> I wondered, because there are webpages recommending what you have done, with a low noise PSU for the usb bridge circuits.


A lot of people are using PSU`s that are more expensive than the USBridge itself. I think I will try a battery pack to see if cleaner power would bring any further improvements to my setup. 

Anyway, even with two switching PSUs USBridge sounds great, so for now I`m happy as it is.


----------



## alphaman

> JWahl said: ↑
> I think this is a similar concept behind NAD's digital direct amplifiers. Of course their digital process is different than Chord's but same idea.
> 
> Where I think that type of tech has the potential to shine is in active speakers with direct digital active cross overs.
> ...





Rob Watts said:


> No it is very different to the NAD (actually Qualcomm's DDFA) technology; I know because I invented the technology behind DDFA. The key difference is that it is a non switching output.


Qualcomm just recently made DDFA avail. on a single chip:
https://www.audioxpress.com/news/ne...-superior-audio-in-smaller-low-power-speakers

Mr. Watts:

is your "DDFA" technology similar to the "direct-digital" technology Sharp Electronics created in the 1990s for their high-end amps?


https://www.stereophile.com/integratedamps/253/index.html


----------



## Rob Watts

No that used 1 bit PDM or 64FS DSD. And the measurements indicate no feedback; DDFA is high resolution and incorporates high order feedback and is capable of very low levels of THD and N.


----------



## genotabby

Deftone said:


> This is a good cable for people in the UK https://www.qed.co.uk/cables/hdmi-digital/qed-reference-optical-quartz-digital-audio-cable.html#tab1
> 
> A few chord owners using this here including myself. I decided to purchase one after my cheap and cheerful kabeldirekt optical was loosing connection and making popping sounds regularly.





Deftone said:


> This is a good cable for people in the UK https://www.qed.co.uk/cables/hdmi-digital/qed-reference-optical-quartz-digital-audio-cable.html#tab1
> 
> A few chord owners using this here including myself. I decided to purchase one after my cheap and cheerful kabeldirekt optical was loosing connection and making popping sounds regularly.



Hi I am experiencing some popping sound regularly through the supplied usb. How did you figure it was the optical cable and not the interconnect?


----------



## Zzt231gr

Zzt231gr said:


> Guys,has anyone tried installing ferrite on the DC power cable?Before the usb input of the power supply?
> 
> I don't remember anyone doing so in this thread...I am very curious!



Bump!


----------



## miketlse

Zzt231gr said:


> Bump!


I think there have been posts about using ferrites on power cables, but much of the experimentation/talk about using ferrites happened on the Mojo and Blu2 threads, so you may find what you are searching for on those threads.


----------



## Zzt231gr

miketlse said:


> I think there have been posts about using ferrites on power cables, but much of the experimentation/talk about using ferrites happened on the Mojo and Blu2 threads, so you may find what you are searching for on those threads.


Thank you.

I am aware of that but that doesn't mean Qutest behaves the same!


----------



## alphaman

Rob Watts said:


> No that used 1 bit PDM or 64FS DSD. And the measurements indicate no feedback; DDFA is high resolution and incorporates high order feedback and is capable of very low levels of THD and N.


Yeah, that Sharp has some issues with jitter! Still,  not a bad first attempt given all that was praised about it 20 years ago. As the Munich presentation noted. In the 90s, Sharp created a dedicated ASIC to implement this "new" technology.
It's curious how the HiFi Munich 2018 presentation on DSD amps (see prev. post), made no mention of other direct-digital amps such as TacT or NAD or DDFA -- it was only Andrus Aaslaid, speaking about orig. Sharp and his new Estelon direct-digital speaker.

Speaking of "direct-digital" .... 
Mr Watts, is this what your Pulse-Array d/a conversion is based on? That is, a digital stream is fed into the P-A fpga's that can drive amps "directly" (apart from the simple output R-C filter immediately following)?


----------



## Icenine2

Why are these frequently for sale? Do listeners feel a need to upgrade to Hugo @ TT or Dave? Seems like a fair amount sell these fairly new. I'm going to listen to this and the Hugo 2 TT next week. I can't imagine needing the TT and using the Headphone amp as well and replacing my Cavalli Liquid Fire but I've been wrong mucho times before!


----------



## Jon L

Icenine2 said:


> Why are these frequently for sale?



Really?  When I was looking to buy one, there may have been 1, maybe 2 on sale on the used market in the whole world; and even then, they were asking for like $100 off MSRP, so I ended up with a new unit.  
If you consider how many thousands of these popular units Chord must have sold by now, the percentage seems very low...


----------



## Icenine2

Two on eBay right now. Check the Forum here for DAC's and check how many have sold.


----------



## Icenine2

Forum listings


----------



## Icenine2

Audiogon


----------



## Qute Beats

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you.
> 
> I am aware of that but that doesn't mean Qutest behaves the same!


Hi, I moved my system about and ended up having to route rca cable near power cable, so put ferrites on the power leads to both Qutest and amp, as normally keep those well separated.  There was no negative to this,  as to positives, hard to say, but no harm.  I basically have ferrites all over the place now as I like to think they help.  They certainly did on my USB cable, but using optical now.  Very cheap so experiment.


----------



## betula

@Icenine2 What are you trying to prove? Qutest is a popular DAC. If a product is popular and is sold in relatively large numbers, you will find more of it on the secondhand market too. 
The fact Qutest hardly loses anything on the secondhand market from the retail price compared to other DACs speaks for itself.


----------



## Qute Beats (May 5, 2019)

Icenine2 said:


> Why are these frequently for sale? Do listeners feel a need to upgrade to Hugo @ TT or Dave? Seems like a fair amount sell these fairly new. I'm going to listen to this and the Hugo 2 TT next week. I can't imagine needing the TT and using the Headphone amp as well and replacing my Cavalli Liquid Fire but I've been wrong mucho times before!


I would only sell mine if buying a TT2!  But, as I posted a few pages back the improvement between the two was I thought quite small, though definitely there, but price is the factor. However if folk are considering an expensive headamp with the Qutest, then the amp on TT2 is very good and there may not then be much in it cost wise.


----------



## Icenine2

Qute Beats said:


> I would only sell mine if buying a TT2!  But, as I posted a few pages back the improvement between the two was I thought quite small, though definitely there, but price is the factor. However if folk are considering an expensive headamp with the Qutest, then the amp on TT2 is very good and there may not then be much in it cost wise.


That's what I would think. Thank you. What I was wondering is if some buy the Qutest, love it and jetison their preamp or headphone amp to get an all-in-one w/the Hugo 2TT or Dave instead.


----------



## Qute Beats

Icenine2 said:


> That's what I would think. Thank you. What I was wondering is if some buy the Qutest, love it and jetison their preamp or headphone amp to get an all-in-one w/the Hugo 2TT or Dave instead.


I've not done this yet obviously, but yes that would be my next move.  I personally don't think the increased tap count is the major contributor to improved SQ, but having a better quality analogue stage with shortest possible path to output is.


----------



## Qute Beats

Qute Beats said:


> I've not done this yet obviously, but yes that would be my next move.  I personally don't think the increased tap count is the major contributor to improved SQ, but having a better quality analogue stage with shortest possible path to output is.


Also the TT2 can drive speakers directly with XLR to speaker wire adaptor.  I ran Monitor Audio Silver 10s straight from TT2 XLRs (diy cable) and got lovely sound at reasonable (not chest thumping) volume.  The MA's are spec'ed at 4ohm and 90db sensitivity.  TT2 I think gives 18watts into 8ohm via XLR, so you can roughly double that into 4ohm.


----------



## dac64

Icenine2 said:


> Audiogon



Well! The Qutest is a good match for my 30k pre amp.

Maybe those sellers didn't own a 30k pre amp!


----------



## kumar402

one of the reason i see is the price difference in UK and US. In UK you can buy it for ~$1300 and if you have a good relation with some dealers then may be lesser and over here it is available for 1800+.
So some are trying to make a few bucks by selling it in US for say 1500 or 1400.


----------



## Rob Watts

alphaman said:


> Yeah, that Sharp has some issues with jitter! Still,  not a bad first attempt given all that was praised about it 20 years ago. As the Munich presentation noted. In the 90s, Sharp created a dedicated ASIC to implement this "new" technology.
> It's curious how the HiFi Munich 2018 presentation on DSD amps (see prev. post), made no mention of other direct-digital amps such as TacT or NAD or DDFA -- it was only Andrus Aaslaid, speaking about orig. Sharp and his new Estelon direct-digital speaker.
> 
> Speaking of "direct-digital" ....
> Mr Watts, is this what your Pulse-Array d/a conversion is based on? That is, a digital stream is fed into the P-A fpga's that can drive amps "directly" (apart from the simple output R-C filter immediately following)?



DDFA did not use pulse array as it is a PWM switching output... My pulse array DACs are linear outputs, and the feedback loop with pulse array DACs is analogue only.


----------



## Gibson59

Is anyone else using Qutest as your main DAC in your speaker system?

As good as Qutest sounds with my HEKse/Milo it has paid equal or greater dividends with my Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers that are driven by a Peachtree Nova 220se amp.  The Peachtree is solid state amp, but leans towards warmth and the Martin Logans are very musical.  Mix in the clean, detailed, transparent Qutest and I've achieved great synergy amongst the components!

Curious what speaker/amp combos everyone else is enjoying with their Qutest.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Gibson59 said:


> Is anyone else using Qutest as your main DAC in your speaker system?
> 
> As good as Qutest sounds with my HEKse/Milo it has paid equal or greater dividends with my Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers that are driven by a Peachtree Nova 220se amp.  The Peachtree is solid state amp, but leans towards warmth and the Martin Logans are very musical.  Mix in the clean, detailed, transparent Qutest and I've achieved great synergy amongst the components!
> 
> Curious what speaker/amp combos everyone else is enjoying with their Qutest.


Exposure 3010S2 power amp with passive preamp and Epos M15 speakers.CD playback only.The room is treated and dedicated listening room.

The system is highly musical and extremely revealing.This has it's cons though,because you don't enjoy badly mastered albums!And they are more than you think...


----------



## Joe-Siow

Leben CS300XS integrated amp driving the Omega Super Alnico Monitors for me
Also have the Uptone JS-2 powering the SMS-200 and Qutest, with a power conditioner

Lightly treated with bass traps only, do intend to add diffuser panels and a rug
Sounds more than decent if I am honest


----------



## HumanMedia

Joe-Siow said:


> Leben CS300XS integrated amp driving the Omega Super Alnico Monitors for me
> Also have the Uptone JS-2 powering the SMS-200 and Qutest, with a power conditioner
> 
> Lightly treated with bass traps only, do intend to add diffuser panels and a rug
> Sounds more than decent if I am honest



Hail to the JS-2!
One point to consider is that powering two devices from the JS-2 defeats the galvanic isolation and could be creating a noise loop. Check with uptone to confirm.


----------



## Joe-Siow

HumanMedia said:


> Hail to the JS-2!
> One point to consider is that powering two devices from the JS-2 defeats the galvanic isolation and could be creating a noise loop. Check with uptone to confirm.



Interesting point. I'll be sure to email Alex to find out more. Thanks!


----------



## jwbrent

Raidho XT-1s driven by a Luxman MQ-88 tube amp with the Qutest as my DAC. Still using my MacBook Air with the latest version of Audirvana (v3.5) to feed the Qutest. Kimber cables. Highly musical sounding.


----------



## Qute Beats (May 8, 2019)

Gibson59 said:


> Is anyone else using Qutest as your main DAC in your speaker system?
> 
> As good as Qutest sounds with my HEKse/Milo it has paid equal or greater dividends with my Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers that are driven by a Peachtree Nova 220se amp.  The Peachtree is solid state amp, but leans towards warmth and the Martin Logans are very musical.  Mix in the clean, detailed, transparent Qutest and I've achieved great synergy amongst the components!
> 
> Curious what speaker/amp combos everyone else is enjoying with their Qutest.


For speakers I go direct into Exposure XXVIII Power Amp and Monitor Audio Silver 10s.  Room is treated with absorbent panels on walls and a couple of base traps. Lovely.


----------



## nephilim32

Zzt231gr said:


> Exposure 3010S2 power amp with passive preamp and Epos M15 speakers.CD playback only.The room is treated and dedicated listening room.
> 
> The system is highly musical and extremely revealing.This has it's cons though,because you don't enjoy badly mastered albums!And they are more than you think...



Having a great system or a well thought out soundchain won’t allow you to enjoy poorly mastered music. 

Try listening to (on your nice rig there  The Black Angels “Death Song’ or any Remastered Iron Maiden from 1998. I dare you! Lol. 

You gotta good system. Don’t feel like your equipment slouches in any way cause crappy mastering can’t be handled. Garbage in garbage out.


----------



## Chop-Top

Gibson59 said:


> Curious what speaker/amp combos everyone else is enjoying with their Qutest



Teddy Pardo PR1 pre, Naim NAP 250-2 amp and Thiel CS2.4 speakers.  Sounds sublime!


----------



## Chop-Top

BTW, I auditioned the M-Scaler and Qutest at a headphone meet this past weekend.  Luckily for my wallet I didn't think the the combo was particularly better than the Qutest alone.


----------



## Deftone

Chop-Top said:


> BTW, I auditioned the M-Scaler and Qutest at a headphone meet this past weekend.  Luckily for my wallet I didn't think the the combo was particularly better than the Qutest alone.



Theres a lot of noise at shows and meets, wouldnt it be more ideal to make that kind of conclusion when you hear it in isolation?


----------



## Chop-Top

Deftone said:


> Theres a lot of noise at shows and meets, wouldnt it be more ideal to make that kind of conclusion when you hear it in isolation?


You have a point, but the Focal Stellias did a pretty good job at blocking out the crowd noise.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Chop-Top said:


> BTW, I auditioned the M-Scaler and Qutest at a headphone meet this past weekend.  Luckily for my wallet I didn't think the the combo was particularly better than the Qutest alone.



I was less fortunate in that I had the MScaler for home trial over a period of 6 days. By the time it left my setup, I was utterly hooked on it. Had to detox from my setup for a good few days after


----------



## Nik74

I m very excited to see what’s coming from Chord today ! 
I m pairing my Qutest with a Luxman SQ-N100 integrated and the entry level Audio Note AX-2 standmount. Such a musical communicator that I find it difficult to listen critically 
Happy 30th Chord Electronics !


----------



## Zzt231gr

Qute Beats said:


> For speakers I go direct into Exposure XXVIII Power Amp and Monitor Audio Silver 10s.  Room is treated with absorbent panels on walls and a couple of base traps. Lovely.



Your preamp?



nephilim32 said:


> Having a great system or a well thought out soundchain won’t allow you to enjoy poorly mastered music.
> 
> Try listening to (on your nice rig there  The Black Angels “Death Song’ or any Remastered Iron Maiden from 1998. I dare you! Lol.
> 
> You gotta good system. Don’t feel like your equipment slouches in any way cause ****ty mastering can’t be handled. Garbage in garbage out.



Thank you.Lucky me,I don't own these...Pink Floyds' Wish You Where Here 2012 remastering sounds excellent!

BTW,sometimes the output filters tame the harshness and you don't have to lower the volume that much.


----------



## 211276

Gibson59 said:


> Is anyone else using Qutest as your main DAC in your speaker system?
> 
> As good as Qutest sounds with my HEKse/Milo it has paid equal or greater dividends with my Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers that are driven by a Peachtree Nova 220se amp.  The Peachtree is solid state amp, but leans towards warmth and the Martin Logans are very musical.  Mix in the clean, detailed, transparent Qutest and I've achieved great synergy amongst the components!
> 
> Curious what speaker/amp combos everyone else is enjoying with their Qutest.



NVA P90SA pre amp, NVA A80 monoblocks, NVA Cube 1 speakers, NVA TSC interconnectors and NVA TSCS speaker cable. The streamer is the Sonore microRendu. Have recently added the Mscaler, its benefits very apparant.


----------



## 211276

Joe-Siow said:


> I was less fortunate in that I had the MScaler for home trial over a period of 6 days. By the time it left my setup, I was utterly hooked on it. Had to detox from my setup for a good few days after



When I auditioned the Mscaler with  Qutest at a dealers I was not that impressed. When I took it home on a ten day loan it was a different matter and I could not be without it. Appreciated it most in the five weeks I had to wait for one to arrive from Chord.


----------



## Joe-Siow

211276 said:


> When I auditioned the Mscaler with  Qutest at a dealers I was not that impressed. When I took it home on a ten day loan it was a different matter and I could not be without it. Appreciated it most in the five weeks I had to wait for one to arrive from Chord.



Yup, that sounds about right


----------



## Qute Beats

Zzt231gr said:


> Your preamp?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Preamp I have is Exposure XXIII, but I prefer the sound of Qutest direct to poweramp and controlling volume on PC.


----------



## Chop-Top

Joe-Siow said:


> I was less fortunate in that I had the MScaler for home trial over a period of 6 days. By the time it left my setup, I was utterly hooked on it. Had to detox from my setup for a good few days after



I probably shouldn't have a home trial then.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Chop-Top said:


> I probably shouldn't have a home trial then.



That depends on how much you hate your wallet. Haha


----------



## Qute Beats

Demo'd a new bit of kit yesterday that's gonna work really well with my Qutest set-up.  It will be a substantial upgrade to my current set up too, so going to place an order.
A La-z-boy rocking recliner!  Super comfy and looks the business.


----------



## Qute Beats




----------



## Qute Beats

Don't think anyone was expecting that, looks fabulous though.  Leaves me wondering if more additions to the range are planned..


----------



## jwbrent

Qute Beats said:


> Don't think anyone was expecting that, looks fabulous though.  Leaves me wondering if more additions to the range are planned..



Streamer would be nice.


----------



## Triode User

Qute Beats said:


> Don't think anyone was expecting that, looks fabulous though.  Leaves me wondering if more additions to the range are planned..



Yes, it makes one wonder what it would plug into within the Chord range in terms of similar price and appearance amplifiers. I wonder if there is something in the pipeline. Perhaps an amplifier to come in the Qutest range?


----------



## Nik74

I second the streamer wish though. 
It would be great to have Rob Watts’ implementation of a source that would feed the Qutest optimally. Preferably with Toslink that would support 192khz.


----------



## Zzt231gr

What about a half-million Mscaler???


----------



## blueninjasix

Qute Beats said:


> Preamp I have is Exposure XXIII, but I prefer the sound of Qutest direct to poweramp and controlling volume on PC.


Same here. Ming Da 8 watt set monoblocs driving Audio Note AZ-2. Any pre-amp and associated cables have reduced transparency so just use Foobar for digital attenuation by 3db.


----------



## Nik74

Apparently the sweet spot of difference is at a million taps so maybe there s less point in a budget m-scaler


----------



## blueninjasix (May 10, 2019)

Triode User said:


> Yes, it makes one wonder what it would plug into within the Chord range in terms of similar price and appearance amplifiers. I wonder if there is something in the pipeline. Perhaps an amplifier to come in the Qutest range?


Digital amplifier hopefully and stripped down m-scaler.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Nik74 said:


> Apparently the sweet spot of difference is at a million taps so maybe there s less point in a budget m-scaler


I have to agree...

But I would prefer something than nothing!


----------



## Triode User

blueninjasix said:


> Digital amplifier hopefully and stripped down m-scaler.



The thing us though that the Huwei is an analogue device so it will need an analogue amplifier to plug into. I could see a Qutest format integrated amplifier that would take the analogue output from the Qutest and also the output from the Huwei and power speakers and headphones. At the right price there might be a big market for that.

Whether a cheaper Mscaler in Qutest format will ever happen might be doubtful because I'm guessing it is difficult to strip down the HMS even more than it is at the moment.


----------



## hornytoad

Nik74 said:


> I second the streamer wish though.
> It would be great to have Rob Watts’ implementation of a source that would feed the Qutest optimally. Preferably with Toslink that would support 192khz.


I'd buy a Chord streamer in a heartbeat.


----------



## hornytoad

jwbrent said:


> Streamer would be nice.


I would love to see a streamer but then Chord would also have to significantly beef up their support department for all the networking problems.
This is why Schiit hasn't followed this path for reasons they explained somewhere here on this site.


----------



## JM1979

I’m pretty sure a 1/2 million tap budget MScaler and an unattached separate Qutest style amp are in complete conflict with Rob’s design principals.


----------



## plsvn

hornytoad said:


> Chord would also have to significantly beef up their support department for all the networking problems



... not holding my breath 
setting up Poly, upon release, was a nightmare and installing 2.0 fw still is
(according to what I'm reading: personally I gave up on Poly back then)


----------



## GreenBow (May 10, 2019)

Roybenz said:


> Been trying the ifi ipower. And i feel that the sound gets a tad darker and smoother compared to stock power supply, but it kinda looses some of it crisp clarity with ipower, is that even possible? any one else tried ifi ipower? Its all connected to IsoTek evo 3 venus power center.



As far as I am aware, you can't take anything off the music with power supplies. Only RFI in power supplies can cause brightness in the music. If your music gets darker then surely that is how it must be. That's going by what I have been told.

RFI or noise in the circuit affects the analogue output parts and adds brightness, or so they say.

It may sound like you are losing detail by the darker signature. However you're gaining it in two ways.


Brightness makes us keep our volume lower.
With brightness gone, the mids and bass textures and details are more balance in the mix.

I used to use some Grado 225e which were bright. When I EQ'd them and took off the brightness, the music was much richer sounding.


----------



## GreenBow (May 10, 2019)

Qute Beats said:


> I would only sell mine if buying a TT2!  But, as I posted a few pages back the improvement between the two was I thought quite small, though definitely there, but price is the factor. However if folk are considering an expensive headamp with the Qutest, then the amp on TT2 is very good and there may not then be much in it cost wise.



TT2 is a solid buy.

(I made a few posts recently in the Hugo 2, TT2, and M-Scaler threads recently about TT2. I did mostly comparison with Hugo 2 posts. There weren't many posts doing that, up to press.)


----------



## Arniesb

GreenBow said:


> As far as I am aware, you can't take anything off the music with power supplies. Only RFI in power supplies can cause brightness in the music. If your music gets darker then surely that is how it must be. That's going by what I have been told.
> 
> RFI or noise in the circuit affects the analogue output parts and adds brightness, or so they say.
> 
> ...


agree. better dacs and amps get less bright they sound. If it sounds annoyingly bright, then power supply must be the reason.


----------



## GreenBow (May 10, 2019)

Arniesb said:


> agree. better dacs and amps get less bright they sound. If it sounds annoyingly bright, then power supply must be the reason.



You can pick RFI in cables too. That's why expensive cables are shielded. The Chord Company Sarum T uses shielding that NASA or the military, use in space technology. (Can't remember which; you'd have to check it out.)

Without shielding, cables simply act just like an antenna on a radio, picking up EM waves.


----------



## Baten

GreenBow said:


> You can pick RFI in cables too. That's why expensive cables are shielded. The Chord Company Sarum T uses shielding that NASA or the military, use in space technology. (Can't remember which; you'd have to check it out.)
> 
> Without shielding, cables simply act just like an antenna on a radio, picking up EM waves.


OK but how many plain/normal/non-space-tech cables are used in the recording of your favorite music?


----------



## Triode User

GreenBow said:


> As far as I am aware, you can't take anything off the music with power supplies. Only RFI in power supplies can cause brightness in the music. If your music gets darker then surely that is how it must be. That's going by what I have been told.
> 
> RFI or noise in the circuit affects the analogue output parts and adds brightness, or so they say.



Yep, spot on. 'Crisp clarity' is probably an RF artifact as opposed to being part of the music.


GreenBow said:


> You can pick RFI in cables too. That's why expensive cables are shielded. The Chord Company Sarum T uses shielding that NASA or the military, use in space technology. (Can't remember which; you'd have to check it out.)
> 
> Without shielding, cables simply act just like an antenna on a radio, picking up EM waves.



The trouble is that the devices that the cables are plugged into also act as aerials so good cable shielding is no guarantee of keeping RF out. And whilst the shield might protect the central conductor it is possible that depending on earthing arrangements, the shield itself might pick up RF and carry it to the device in the ground plane. RF noise is sneaky stuff and can jump past/over some isolation measures.


----------



## jwbrent

Baten said:


> OK but how many plain/normal/non-space-tech cables are used in the recording of your favorite music?



Studios use balanced cable runs specifically to reduce any RFI picked up in the environment.


----------



## 211276

plsvn said:


> ... not holding my breath
> setting up Poly, upon release, was a nightmare and installing 2.0 fw still is
> (according to what I'm reading: personally I gave up on Poly back then)



I thought I might be able to set up Poly but was unable to. A few responses from Chord and then silence. Seems to be a compatibility issue with my router. Have had to return it within the statutory period.


----------



## Qute Beats (May 10, 2019)

Roybenz said:


> Been trying the ifi ipower. And i feel that the sound gets a tad darker and smoother compared to stock power supply, but it kinda looses some of it crisp clarity with ipower, is that even possible? any one else tried ifi ipower? Its all connected to IsoTek evo 3 venus power center.


I use stock PSU, but do use the iFi AC Purifier.  I moved Qutest from attic room which had it's own ring main (and where Qutest and amp were on separate outlets to the PC/HDD), to the ground floor (fridge, microwave etc etc on on same ring main) where Qutest, amp, PC etc had to sit on the same power strip, but it didn't sound as quite good.  I tried iFi purifier in the middle of the power strip between Qutest/amp and the PC gear and the sound improved again, a tad smoother/darker.  It may be snake oil and YMMV, but I do think it does what is claims and reduces noise on the AC.

edit: never bothered doing any blind testing though, seems to work so left it as that.


----------



## GreenBow (May 10, 2019)

Triode User said:


> Yep, spot on. 'Crisp clarity' is probably an RF artifact as opposed to being part of the music.
> 
> The trouble is that the devices that the cables are plugged into also act as aerials so good cable shielding is no guarantee of keeping RF out. And whilst the shield might protect the central conductor it is possible that depending on earthing arrangements, the shield itself might pick up RF and carry it to the device in the ground plane. RF noise is sneaky stuff and can jump past/over some isolation measures.



Hence why Chord Electronics use thick aluminium for their casework, as it blocks RFI. Also why I use (or prefer) analogue only amplifiers, as digital circuitry in amplifiers causes RFI or noise.


----------



## Triode User

GreenBow said:


> Hence why Chord Electronics use thick aluminium for their casework, as it blocks RFI. Also why I use (or prefer) analogue only amplifiers, as digital circuitry in amplifiers causes RFI or noise.



So you will not be using digital amplifiers connected to your MScaler via the DX outputs?


----------



## kumar402

Paired my Qutest with a new source, digione signature player,using BNC. Powering the HAT with LIFEPO4 batteries. It works as Roon end point and has airplay cababilities.


----------



## Baten

kumar402 said:


> Paired my Qutest with a new source, digione signature player,using BNC. Powering the HAT with LIFEPO4 batteries. It works as Roon end point and has airplay cababilities.



Nice set-up! I'm positive Allo signature is right up there with the very best transports. Only thing I don't like is the battery pack though. I honestly think batteries are overrated.

Allo is working on a dedicated low noise PSU though, should be out soon.


----------



## miketlse

kumar402 said:


> Paired my Qutest with a new source, digione signature player,using BNC. Powering the HAT with LIFEPO4 batteries. It works as Roon end point and has airplay cababilities.


Interesting. I have been umming and arring between the digione, usbbridge or a full nuc build this week, but not made a final decision.


----------



## bikutoru (May 11, 2019)

My setup is very similar, only with the black case. 
I've had RP3 with original Digione for close to two years running Volumio and manually installed Roon bridge. They feed the Coax and USB inputs, and Chromcast audio does the Optical(just in case somebody want to chromecast).


----------



## jwbrent

My rig. You can barely see the Qutest next to my laptop.


----------



## Baten

jwbrent said:


> My rig. You can barely see the Qutest next to my laptop.



Cute doggo


----------



## Chop-Top

jwbrent said:


> My rig. You can barely see the Qutest next to my laptop.



Sweet looking system!


----------



## miketlse

jwbrent said:


> My rig. You can barely see the Qutest next to my laptop.


You are very considerate to position your music system, to optimise the listening experience at your dogs favourite cushion.


----------



## jwbrent

miketlse said:


> You are very considerate to position your music system, to optimise the listening experience at your dogs favourite cushion.



He has better ears than I do!


----------



## nephilim32

Zzt231gr said:


> Your preamp?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Pink Floyd remasters are an exception because the 2011 and 1992 remasters are quite good, however more often than not it really depends on your headphones tuning. For instance. I own the hd 800’s and lcd xc’s and the way each of those headphones treats louder or more compressed sources is so very different. Hd 800’s have absolutely no forgiveness or mercy with mediocre mastering. Very unforgivable even with a strong soundchain like a qutest in the mix. Sadly.


----------



## kumar402

nephilim32 said:


> Pink Floyd remasters are an exception because the 2011 and 1992 remasters are quite good, however more often than not it really depends on your headphones tuning. For instance. I own the hd 800’s and lcd xc’s and the way each of those headphones treats louder or more compressed sources is so very different. Hd 800’s have absolutely no forgiveness or mercy with mediocre mastering. Very unforgivable even with a strong soundchain like a qutest in the mix. Sadly.


That's the problem with TOTL headphones. Most of them are very resolving and unforgiving on bad mastered songs. In case any TOTL is smooth or forgiving they are tagged as south or north of neutral and hence not TOTL worthy.


----------



## Zzt231gr

nephilim32 said:


> Pink Floyd remasters are an exception because the 2011 and 1992 remasters are quite good, however more often than not it really depends on your headphones tuning. For instance. I own the hd 800’s and lcd xc’s and the way each of those headphones treats louder or more compressed sources is so very different. Hd 800’s have absolutely no forgiveness or mercy with mediocre mastering. Very unforgivable even with a strong soundchain like a qutest in the mix. Sadly.


You are correct!2011 remaster.


----------



## nephilim32

kumar402 said:


> That's the problem with TOTL headphones. Most of them are very resolving and unforgiving on bad mastered songs. In case any TOTL is smooth or forgiving they are tagged as south or north of neutral and hence not TOTL worthy.



I honesty don’t think it is a problem.  
It just gives me an excuse to buy more than one headphone for justifiable needs. Lol. 
I have 4 headphones I use quite regularly, but only 2 of those are for serious listening...with the Qutest of course!!!


----------



## kumar402

Currently I have Chord Qutest and Gumby with me. So I thought of spending this beautiful and sunny Saturday afternoon in Long _Island _within the comfort of my bedroom comparing the DACs ,I mean thats what an audiophile is supposed to do in a sunny afternoon. I am using HD800s and 600 to compare and will first use Valhalla 2 and then LP with sys as switch box. I am not sure how to volume match both as I am using 2v out and I guess that should help me to do have same volume. Based on initial impression, I feel Gumby pushes the stage little back and Qutest brings things more upfront and Valhalla2 as dry treble and Gumby is taking the leading edge off which may and may not be good thing based on headhone and amp one has. Will report back later however I am not a technical audiophile so my comparison will miss words like transient etc, it will be in words of layman audiophile.
PS: I own both and so I feel I will not have any bias but I will leave that for self discovery.


----------



## hornytoad

kumar402 said:


> Currently I have Chord Qutest and Gumby with me. So I thought of spending this beautiful and sunny Saturday afternoon in Long _Island _within the comfort of my bedroom comparing the DACs ,I mean thats what an audiophile is supposed to do in a sunny afternoon. I am using HD800s and 600 to compare and will first use Valhalla 2 and then LP with sys as switch box. I am not sure how to volume match both as I am using 2v out and I guess that should help me to do have same volume. Based on initial impression, I feel Gumby pushes the stage little back and Qutest brings things more upfront and Valhalla2 as dry treble and Gumby is taking the leading edge off which may and may not be good thing based on headhone and amp one has. Will report back later however I am not a technical audiophile so my comparison will miss words like transient etc, it will be in words of layman audiophile.
> PS: I own both and so I feel I will not have any bias but I will leave that for self discovery.


The Qutest is the better dac . I’ve had both and the Qutest simply is more transparent and offers higher resolution but still sounds natural


----------



## lectrolink

Has anyone had issues getting above 24/96khz using the hi-res streaming services? I am running Qobuz (Studio Quality) via the BluOS app into a Node 2i, then into the Qutest via single coax. Tracks that are listed as 24/192 are only showing the green light, indicating 96khz sample rate. 

Also, I've had stream services like Amazon Prime showing a red light on the Qutest (indicating a 44.1 khz sample rate), but Amazon Prime's 256 kbps bitrate is well below CD bitrate of 1411kbps. Any comments welcome on streaming sample rate indications with the Qutest.


----------



## kumar402

lectrolink said:


> Has anyone had issues getting above 24/96khz using the hi-res streaming services? I am running Qobuz (Studio Quality) via the BluOS app into a Node 2i, then into the Qutest via single coax. Tracks that are listed as 24/192 are only showing the green light, indicating 96khz sample rate.
> 
> Also, I've had stream services like Amazon Prime showing a red light on the Qutest (indicating a 44.1 khz sample rate), but Amazon Prime's 256 kbps bitrate is well below CD bitrate of 1411kbps. Any comments welcome on streaming sample rate indications with the Qutest.


Well I am using Qobuz via roon and I am able to stream 24/192Khz to raspberry Pi streamer connected to Qutest via COAX. Check in the app if there is upper limit set for streaming


----------



## flea22

hey guys, would using a y splitter with the qutest degrade sq. I want to use the qutest with my headphone amp and my peachtree nova, and i'm getting tired of swapping rca cables.
Cheers


----------



## kumar402

Leigh Quigg said:


> hey guys, would using a y splitter with the qutest degrade sq. I want to use the qutest with my headphone amp and my peachtree nova, and i'm getting tired of swapping rca cables.
> Cheers


Do you want to use both at the same time? If not then you can use something like Schiit Sys which is very transparent at 100% volume


----------



## flea22

kumar402 said:


> Do you want to use both at the same time? If not then you can use something like Schiit Sys which is very transparent at 100% volume


No don't want to use both at the same time, just had a look at the schiit sys and it looks like it would do the job. 
Thanks


----------



## jwbrent

Leigh Quigg said:


> hey guys, would using a y splitter with the qutest degrade sq. I want to use the qutest with my headphone amp and my peachtree nova, and i'm getting tired of swapping rca cables.
> Cheers



Since you are not using both components at the same time, you should be okay with high quality splitters that do not use cables, i.e., an all metal design. Just make sure the component not in use is turned off so the Qutest doesn’t see two loads which would impact its performance. My two cents on the matter.


----------



## kerisabe

Hi, 

Has anyone tried installing stillpoints ers inside their top/bottom part of their qutest? How about on the usb power entrance point inside the qutest? Im also thinking of doing in along the wallwart cable as well. Hope to hear your experiences/comments! Thank you


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> Hi,
> 
> Has anyone tried installing stillpoints ers inside their top/bottom part of their qutest? How about on the usb power entrance point inside the qutest? Im also thinking of doing in along the wallwart cable as well. Hope to hear your experiences/comments! Thank you


Looked up the 'ers'.  interesting concept, can believe they may of use with cheap gear with very thin metal casework but can't see how they would benefit the very solid Qutest at all.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Looked up the 'ers'.  interesting concept, can believe they may of use with cheap gear with very thin metal casework but can't see how they would benefit the very solid Qutest at all.



The way i think of it is not rfi/emi from the outside, but more of dispersing/reducing the high rfi created from inside the qutest dac itself, reducing it by putting it on top and bottom part of the casing.

Tried doing it, the qutest board has at least 0.5cm perpendicular to the ers (top and bottom case). Also added some ers to the stock wallwart sides, and the usb plug that powers the qutest. Last was opening up my speakers and putting a small piece below the crossovers. It is way quieter now. Blacker.


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> The way i think of it is not rfi/emi from the outside, but more of dispersing/reducing the high rfi created from inside the qutest dac itself, reducing it by putting it on top and bottom part of the casing.
> 
> Tried doing it, the qutest board has at least 0.5cm perpendicular to the ers (top and bottom case). Also added some ers to the stock wallwart sides, and the usb plug that powers the qutest. Last was opening up my speakers and putting a small piece below the crossovers. It is way quieter now. Blacker.


Well if if works for you that what counts.  On the Stillpoint website it says carbon coated with metals, its not electrically conductive is it, as that would worry me being close to the PCB?


----------



## jwbrent

kerisabe said:


> The way i think of it is not rfi/emi from the outside, but more of dispersing/reducing the high rfi created from inside the qutest dac itself, reducing it by putting it on top and bottom part of the casing.
> 
> Tried doing it, the qutest board has at least 0.5cm perpendicular to the ers (top and bottom case). Also added some ers to the stock wallwart sides, and the usb plug that powers the qutest. Last was opening up my speakers and putting a small piece below the crossovers. It is way quieter now. Blacker.



I recall early in my audio journeys, VPI made the “magic brick” which was iron, I think, encased in wood. When you placed it on top of a chassis over the transformer, things sounded better. The iron soaked up stray EMI and the weight reduced chassis resonances. Made a nice improvement with my Kenwood L07 mono-blocks which were popular in the early 1980s.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Well if if works for you that what counts.  On the Stillpoint website it says carbon coated with metals, its not electrically conductive is it, as that would worry me being close to the PCB?



Correct, it is conductive, on the sides where it is cut/exposed. For safety, the sides can be covered using the black electrical tapes, which I didnt do cause where the ers is installed the sides are not exposed to the pcb since it is directly submerged into the top/bottom chassis. If you open qutest, the pcb floats in the middle of the chassis.


----------



## riverred105

Does the cutest or hugo 2 suffer interference when directly touching an iPhone or iPad (WiFi lte, BT active for both).


----------



## kerisabe

jwbrent said:


> I recall early in my audio journeys, VPI made the “magic brick” which was iron, I think, encased in wood. When you placed it on top of a chassis over the transformer, things sounded better. The iron soaked up stray EMI and the weight reduced chassis resonances. Made a nice improvement with my Kenwood L07 mono-blocks which were popular in the early 1980s.



Thank you for the info. Yes i think also with the qutest, putting an isolation device on top of the chassis would work best for it? Since it is rear heavy with all the connection cables connected to it, more heavy on the rear.

When i tried putting 3 stillpoints ultra mini, (1 in front centre, 2 in the back corners due to more weight in the rear part). Feels like the qutest is not “heavy enough” to transfer the resonance/weight to the stillpoints. Havent tried it with bigger stillpoints. Maybe putting an isolation device on top? Any suggestions from your experience?


----------



## kerisabe

riverred105 said:


> Does the cutest or hugo 2 suffer interference when directly touching an iPhone or iPad (WiFi lte, BT active for both).



From what i have learned, aside from outside interference, dac produces one of the highest rate of noise in your audio chain. I supposed they suffer interference when directly touching an iphone/ipad without any direct audible difference.


----------



## jwbrent

kerisabe said:


> Thank you for the info. Yes i think also with the qutest, putting an isolation device on top of the chassis would work best for it? Since it is rear heavy with all the connection cables connected to it, more heavy on the rear.
> 
> When i tried putting 3 stillpoints ultra mini, (1 in front centre, 2 in the back corners due to more weight in the rear part). Feels like the qutest is not “heavy enough” to transfer the resonance/weight to the stillpoints. Havent tried it with bigger stillpoints. Maybe putting an isolation device on top? Any suggestions from your experience?



I just checked the VPI website, but it appears they don’t sell the brick anymore. Other than that, no, I have no idea about something similar.


----------



## jwbrent (May 21, 2019)

Here’s a retailer who has stock ...

http://www.elusivedisc.com/VPI-Magic-Brick-Set-of-2/productinfo/VPI-BRICK/

They used to be in a natural colored wood; now it appears they are black.

You may also want to check eBay.


----------



## kerisabe

jwbrent said:


> Here’s a retailer who has stock ...
> 
> http://www.elusivedisc.com/VPI-Magic-Brick-Set-of-2/productinfo/VPI-BRICK/
> 
> ...



Thanks for finding the link @jwbrent I will def look into it. Black is even better, seamless w the qutest.


----------



## jwbrent

kerisabe said:


> Thanks for finding the link @jwbrent I will def look into it. Black is even better, seamless w the qutest.



They are not as wide as a Qutest, but I think a tad deeper. You might ask if you can just buy one instead of both unless you want to try it out on your power amp.


----------



## kerisabe

jwbrent said:


> They are not as wide as a Qutest, but I think a tad deeper. You might ask if you can just buy one instead of both unless you want to try it out on your power amp.



Ic. Crazy how the price of the vpi has gone up since it was first introduced. Im going to wait for my integrated 2 ch to arrive before getting the magic bricks. Would the brick make alot of diff placed on top of the laptop music source? The laptop is connected to the qutest using optical to eliminate noise.


----------



## jwbrent

kerisabe said:


> Ic. Crazy how the price of the vpi has gone up since it was first introduced. Im going to wait for my integrated 2 ch to arrive before getting the magic bricks. Would the brick make alot of diff placed on top of the laptop music source? The laptop is connected to the qutest using optical to eliminate noise.



I remember paying about $80 for two of them ... 35 years ago. Check eBay or Audiogon.

The biggest effect is soaking up EMI, that’s why it was designed to sit right over the power supply transformer. I have no idea what, if any, effect it would have on a laptop.


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> Ic. Crazy how the price of the vpi has gone up since it was first introduced. Im going to wait for my integrated 2 ch to arrive before getting the magic bricks. Would the brick make alot of diff placed on top of the laptop music source? The laptop is connected to the qutest using optical to eliminate noise.


They sure are expensive, have a look into making a DIY one.  A good tool for the job would be a plunge cutter, it can cut out a neat cavity in a block of wood, mine was bought from Lidl for £30.


----------



## miketlse

jwbrent said:


> I remember paying about $80 for two of them ... 35 years ago. Check eBay or Audiogon.
> 
> The biggest effect is soaking up EMI, that’s why it was designed to sit right over the power supply transformer. I have no idea what, if any, effect it would have on a laptop.


In those days iron and steel were cheaply available, probably only a dollar or two, so there was a large markup for manufacture and retail.


----------



## jbarrentine (May 23, 2019)

The qutest is so good the only possible upgrade is apparently magic rocks and bricks. As heavy as the qutest is it doesn't need anything sitting on top of it. Or special feet. Or any other lunacy.

This is all the kind of thing that give the lot of us bad names everywhere else in audio. It disappoints me every time I read it.


----------



## Joe-Siow

jbarrentine said:


> The qutest is so good the only possible upgrade is apparently magic rocks and bricks. As heavy as the qutest is it doesn't need anything sitting on top of it. Or special feet. Or any other lunacy.
> 
> This is all the kind of thing that give the lot of us bad names everywhere else in audio. It disappoints me every time I read it.



Jesus Christ, get over it already


----------



## Baten

jbarrentine said:


> The qutest is so good the only possible upgrade is apparently magic rocks and bricks. As heavy as the qutest is it doesn't need anything sitting on top of it. Or special feet. Or any other lunacy.
> 
> This is all the kind of thing that give the lot of us bad names everywhere else in audio. It disappoints me every time I read it.


Here's a crazy idea. XLR interconnects and common mode rejection


----------



## jbarrentine

Joe-Siow said:


> Jesus Christ, get over it already



Yeah tell ME to be quiet while people push a product literally called "the magic brick" for three HUNDRED dollars. That offends me to my core and I'm going to say so. Don't really care what you think.


----------



## Zzt231gr

jbarrentine said:


> Yeah tell ME to be quiet while people push a product literally called "the magic brick" for three HUNDRED dollars. That offends me to my core and I'm going to say so. Don't really care what you think.


It is the MAGIC that does the trick...


----------



## jwbrent

jbarrentine said:


> The qutest is so good the only possible upgrade is apparently magic rocks and bricks. As heavy as the qutest is it doesn't need anything sitting on top of it. Or special feet. Or any other lunacy.
> 
> This is all the kind of thing that give the lot of us bad names everywhere else in audio. It disappoints me every time I read it.



To each his own ...


----------



## schnesim

AFAIK Ted Smith throws away the clock info of the incoming data and reconstructs the packets through pattern matching to eliminate source jitter.

Does the Qutest do something similar? I'm asking since I'm wondering whether a separate reclocker will make sense with the Qutest.


----------



## miketlse

schnesim said:


> AFAIK Ted Smith throws away the clock info of the incoming data and reconstructs the packets through pattern matching to eliminate source jitter.
> 
> Does the Qutest do something similar? I'm asking since I'm wondering whether a separate reclocker will make sense with the Qutest.


Don't waste your money on a separate reclocker https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...-official-thread.869417/page-37#post-14027139


----------



## Baten

miketlse said:


> Don't waste your money on a separate reclocker https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...-official-thread.869417/page-37#post-14027139


Indeed. Most important part:

_The measurements shown earlier in this thread and the Hugo 2 thread show zero measurable noise floor modulation and zero source and master clock jitter aberrations_


----------



## schnesim

miketlse said:


> Don't waste your money on a separate reclocker https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...-official-thread.869417/page-37#post-14027139





Baten said:


> Indeed. Most important part:
> 
> _The measurements shown earlier in this thread and the Hugo 2 thread show zero measurable noise floor modulation and zero source and master clock jitter aberrations_



Thanks! Just out of curiosity, do you have a link to the measurements? I tried using the search function, but without luck.


----------



## x RELIC x

schnesim said:


> Thanks! Just out of curiosity, do you have a link to the measurements? I tried using the search function, but without luck.



https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.831345/page-735#post-14048832


----------



## kerisabe

Question about qutest output volt, if my amp’s input sensitivity is lower than qutest’s lowest output volt (at 0,617v) what are the solutions? Or i just have to suck it up and go with qutest’s lowest setting at 1V? Or is there any workaround it? @Rob Watts Thanks in advance Rob.


----------



## kumar402

kerisabe said:


> Question about qutest output volt, if my amp’s input sensitivity is lower than qutest’s lowest output volt (at 0,617v) what are the solutions? Or i just have to suck it up and go with qutest’s lowest setting at 1V? Or is there any workaround it? @Rob Watts Thanks in advance Rob.


What amp are you using. If even 1v is hot for it then you need to invest in good preamp.


----------



## Triode User

kerisabe said:


> Question about qutest output volt, if my amp’s input sensitivity is lower than qutest’s lowest output volt (at 0,617v) what are the solutions? Or i just have to suck it up and go with qutest’s lowest setting at 1V? Or is there any workaround it? @Rob Watts Thanks in advance Rob.



It also depends on how your amp sensitivity is specified and what it means by "0.617v". Does it state 0.617v as being the input for a certain output?

Problems arise when an input voltage is too high for the amp sensitivity and then the volume control only has a small operating zone before the volume of the music becomes too loud.  Also a too high an input voltage can cause the preamp stages to 'clip' and cause distortion (this is usually easy to hear and is often quite nasty).

However, in the great scheme of things, 0.6v is not all that different to 1v and I would say there is a good chance you will be OK with that. 

Others may have a more detailed response if you can say what amp you are using.


----------



## Nik74 (May 24, 2019)

A question while we re on the subject of amplifier input sensitivity:  my amplifiers input sensitivity  is 150mV but what I notice is that from the headphone out the highest volume setting I can listen at is about 9.5 position. Through my speakers I can go up to 12 . Could this mean that I need to use a different output setting for my Qutest when I listen through headphones?  Output impedance is 1V/210 Ohm. I do feel that my volume control has a very small operting zone. I use the 2V setting


----------



## Triode User

Based on your headphones volume lisition of about 9.5 for the highest usual listening volume it could well be you would be better off with the Qutest 1v output setting. 

Try it?


----------



## kerisabe

Thanks for the replies guys. The amp im using is the Gryphon Diablo 300. I do have alot of room to move up on volume when the qutest is set to 1V. It doesnt say specifically if the input sensitivity is for balanced or unbalanced. Also it says the gain is +38dB and it also says the Input Impedans, single ended (20-20000Hz) is 20KOhm.


----------



## dac64

kerisabe said:


> Thanks for the replies guys. The amp im using is the Gryphon Diablo 300. I do have alot of room to move up on volume when the qutest is set to 1V. It doesnt say specifically if the input sensitivity is for balanced or unbalanced. Also it says the gain is +38dB and it also says the Input Impedans, single ended (20-20000Hz) is 20KOhm.



All the stardand output of CD player or dac are 2V.

Chord just provides an option for users to fine tuning, to some, this feature may cause some confusions.


----------



## kerisabe

dac64 said:


> All the stardand output of CD player or dac are 2V.
> 
> Chord just provides an option for users to fine tuning, to some, this feature may cause some confusions.



Thanks dac64. This issue is abit clearer for me. So i will try setting the qutest output to 1v and 2v and what are the things that i need to lookout for specifically? Thanks


----------



## OctavianH

Somebody once told us here that the JCAT is a very good USB filter / card and makes the others useless. How right he was.







I started using this in my PC powered by an Sbooster LPS (+Sbooster Ultra) 2 days ago and now I just put on sale all my other USB filters (ISO Regen, iFi stuff and so on). This is a must for any desktop user, and they claim it needs at least 1 week to shine. I will need sun glasses if this is the sound quality I receive after 2 days. A very underrated product, imo.


----------



## kerisabe

OctavianH said:


> Somebody once told us here that the JCAT is a very good USB filter / card and makes the others useless. How right he was.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Happy to hear youre achieving something with USB. I gave up USB last week and fed my qutest through its optical input from my macbook pro and voila, just limited to 24/96 since its an old 2010 mbp.


----------



## OctavianH

I fully understand you and for this particular reason I always had a "plan B" with a CD Transport in Optical input (CXC) and direct CD playback. But now, after JCAT, plan B might not be needed anymore. Anway, since CXC was a steal for 400 EUR I will keep it to enjoy good old "CD playback" and to be able to see the cover and artwork of the music. 
What to say, if you have a free PCI express slot I would say you definitely need to check this JCAT Femto.


----------



## miketlse

435 euros to try and replicate the sound quality that I can already get on optical.
https://jcat.eu/product/net-card-femto/
I don't think that I shall rush to get my wallet out.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Simon Price said:


> Just to say on Chord DACs, this is my opinion of a little super-test on my review FB group.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/321609238504498/posts/329607421038013?sfns=mo


Great but it seems you didn't forget the mandatory Qutest PSU upgrade...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Simon Price said:


> Hi ZZT,
> Just to let you know I did do that on the Qutest review and did mention in the article on best dacs that using a linear psu on the Qutest is an improver for my system and ears. I do think it’s system dependent though as the box supplied psu is perfectly capable. Regards Simon


I 'd take that for a correct comment!


----------



## jwbrent (May 25, 2019)

kerisabe said:


> Happy to hear youre achieving something with USB. I gave up USB last week and fed my qutest through its optical input from my macbook pro and voila, just limited to 24/96 since its an old 2010 mbp.



Many toslink cables, including the excellent Lifatec glass toslink, won’t pass anything above 24/96. The solution is the Sys Concepts toslink which passes 24/192.


----------



## kumar402 (May 25, 2019)

jwbrent said:


> Many toslink cables, including the excellent Lifatec glass toslink, won’t pass anything above 24/96. The solution is the Sys Concepts toslink which passes 24/192.


I have basic one from Amazon and it works fine with 24/192.
Am*azonBasics Optical Toslink to Mini Toslink Jack Digital Audio Cable - 3 feet*


----------



## jwbrent (May 25, 2019)

The Sys Concept, made in Canada, uses 1300 highly polished plastic fibers in its cables and can be custom made with different connectors and different lengths. I’ve owned a couple over the years, and it’s performance is top notch.


----------



## Jon L

miketlse said:


> 435 euros to try and replicate the sound quality that I can already get on optical.
> https://jcat.eu/product/net-card-femto/
> I don't think that I shall rush to get my wallet out.



Just FYI, this is the correct link for USB card:
https://jcat.eu/product/usb-card-femto/

P.S. Many people spend more than 435 for some USB cables or USB filters...


----------



## MagnusH

jwbrent said:


> Many toslink cables, including the excellent Lifatec glass toslink, won’t pass anything above 24/96. The solution is the Sys Concepts toslink which passes 24/192.


I use Lifatec and its 100% stable on 24/192 and DSD over DoP (which is 24/176), I use it on RME ADI-2 DAC though playing directly from computer.


----------



## Baten

Zzt231gr said:


> Great but it seems you didn't forget the mandatory Qutest PSU upgrade...


Mandatory PSU upgrade?? Rob Watts himself disagreed but ok, what a load of unsubstantiated crap.

The stock PSU is _fine_ for all intents and purposes. You guys should ease up on the faerie dust...


----------



## eenecho

MagnusH said:


> I use Lifatec and its 100% stable on 24/192 and DSD over DoP (which is 24/176), I use it on RME ADI-2 DAC though playing directly from computer.



In agreement with MagnusH - I use the Lifatec as well with a Mac Mini and the Hugo2.  I am able to get 24/192 and DSD64.


----------



## miketlse

Jon L said:


> Just FYI, this is the correct link for USB card:
> https://jcat.eu/product/usb-card-femto/
> 
> P.S. Many people spend more than 435 for some USB cables or USB filters...


Don't worry, I am fully aware that some people spend eye watering amounts on those cables and filters.
The point that I obviously failed to communicate effectively, is that I can already obtain excellent sound quality using optical output from my PC, so I shall not be rushing to spend an additional 435 euros, in an attempt to get similar performance via a usb card. If the card had cost say 25 euros, then it could have been an interesting exercise from a curiosity point of view, but not at 435 euros.


----------



## jwbrent

MagnusH said:


> I use Lifatec and its 100% stable on 24/192 and DSD over DoP (which is 24/176), I use it on RME ADI-2 DAC though playing directly from computer.



Good to know they updated the cable. When I had mine about six years ago, it wouldn’t pass 24/192 consistently, especially DSD. I spoke to the engineer there, and he admitted this was a limitation of the design, but told me they hoped to rectify this at some point in the future.

I may need a toslink again for a new hookup, so I’ll try out the Lifatec again; I did prefer its sound to the Sys Concept.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

I`ve upgraded to Hugo TT2, so if anybody wants Qutest - mine is for sale at trade forums.


----------



## kerisabe

eenecho said:


> In agreement with MagnusH - I use the Lifatec as well with a Mac Mini and the Hugo2.  I am able to get 24/192 and DSD64.


 
Phew! Actually Ive just made an order of the lifatec toslink and its reaching jakarta as of now, should be delivered in one or two days now after getting through customs. Currently running my old EMK optical and it clips regularly when running 24/96 out of my MBP. Looking forward forward for the lifatec. @jwbrent you have scared me for a bit there regarding the lifatec not able to handle 24/192


----------



## kerisabe (May 25, 2019)

Ragnar-BY said:


> I`ve upgraded to Hugo TT2, so if anybody wants Qutest - mine is for sale at trade forums.



@Ragnar-BY How much of a difference compared to your qutest?! I was originally intended to purchase the TT2 to run as a preamp in my system before deciding to ditched the preamp/amp combo and just went with an integrated. All the best with the qutest sale. It should be gone in no time!


----------



## Ragnar-BY

kerisabe said:


> How much of a difference compared to your qutest?! I was originally intended to purchase the TT2 to run as a preamp in my system before deciding to ditched the preamp/amp combo and just went with an integrated.


Well, I`ve bought Hugo TT2 and M Scaler, so this fight was not fair from the start. Even without M Scaler TT2 is really good. It is a better DAC and for head-fier it is also an outstanding amp. M Scaler sounds good with both units, but on TT2 it`s effect sounds like real magic. On the other hand, I must admit that Qutest is still a great DAC with a great value. This little brick is the most affordable ticket to the land of high-end DACs.

I would say that if you can afford TT2 - go for it. But if you don`t need headphone amp, pre-amp and full M Scaler magic - you can happily live with Qutest.


----------



## jwbrent

kerisabe said:


> you have scared me for a bit there regarding the lifatec not able to handle 24/192



Yes, I messed up writing that. I had forgotten how long it had been since I owned the Lifatec cable when it couldn’t handle 24/192. After my post, I realized it had been six years since I owned this toslink, so my apologies. I really am happy to hear it can transmit 24/192 since it sounds excellent.


----------



## kerisabe

Ragnar-BY said:


> Well, I`ve bought Hugo TT2 and M Scaler, so this fight was not fair from the start. Even without M Scaler TT2 is really good. It is a better DAC and for head-fier it is also an outstanding amp. M Scaler sounds good with both units, but on TT2 it`s effect sounds like real magic. On the other hand, I must admit that Qutest is still a great DAC with a great value. This little brick is the most affordable ticket to the land of high-end DACs.
> 
> I would say that if you can afford TT2 - go for it. But if you don`t need headphone amp, pre-amp and full M Scaler magic - you can happily live with Qutest.



@Ragnar-BY thanks for the detailed explanation regarding TT2 / Qutest. Ive been wanting M Scaler, but I should ease on the audio spending for now, maybe an addition of the m scaler to the qutest next year. Quite happy with the setup Im running now. Just breaking in the diablo 300, waiting for a proper separated grounding to be installed, installing an isolation transformer in between the main ac and main room receptacle, and the lifatec optical as the icing on the cake.


----------



## kerisabe

jwbrent said:


> Yes, I messed up writing that. I had forgotten how long it had been since I owned the Lifatec cable when it couldn’t handle 24/192. After my post, I realized it had been six years since I owned this toslink, so my apologies. I really am happy to hear it can transmit 24/192 since it sounds excellent.



No worries at all. Looking forward to install the lifatec in my system once the int amp breaking in is done.


----------



## jbarrentine

kerisabe said:


> No worries at all. Looking forward to install the lifatec in my system once the int amp breaking in is done.



As a person who despises the sheer lunacy in hearing a difference in cables...I can hear a difference in SOME cables. Which is why I bought the lifatec. Worth it.


----------



## kerisabe

jbarrentine said:


> As a person who despises the sheer lunacy in hearing a difference in cables...I can hear a difference in SOME cables. Which is why I bought the lifatec. Worth it.



Glad to hear that. Thanks for the assurance.


----------



## dac64

kerisabe said:


> Thanks dac64. This issue is abit clearer for me. So i will try setting the qutest output to 1v and 2v and what are the things that i need to lookout for specifically? Thanks



You may want to look at the output of gryphon cd player or dac.


----------



## kerisabe

dac64 said:


> You may want to look at the output of gryphon cd player or dac.





dac64 said:


> You may want to look at the output of gryphon cd player or dac.



Smart suggestion! Actually the diablo 300 dac single ended output documented at 2,15V which makes sense since I did changed the output on the qutest at 2V yesterday and I thought it sounded the best. And this fact confirms it. At 3V the sound gets distorted and at 1V it sounded too weak I had to crank the diablo way up. Thanks @dac64


----------



## Zzt231gr

Baten said:


> Mandatory PSU upgrade?? Rob Watts himself disagreed but ok, what a load of unsubstantiated ****.
> 
> The stock PSU is _fine_ for all intents and purposes. You guys should ease up on the faerie dust...


Chill man!I was being sarcastic.I am using stock PSU and I am not changing my mind cause of Rob's words!


----------



## Baten (May 26, 2019)

Zzt231gr said:


> Chill man!I was being sarcastic.I am using stock PSU and I am not changing my mind cause of Rob's words!


Oh, my apologies in that case


----------



## Chop-Top

Would the Mojo be an acceptable substitute for the Qutest for office listening?


----------



## betula

Chop-Top said:


> Would the Mojo be an acceptable substitute for the Qutest for office listening?


Far but acceptable. Mojo is my mobile compromise. Nothing comes close for the price but don't expect Qutest performance.


----------



## miketlse (May 26, 2019)

Chop-Top said:


> Would the Mojo be an acceptable substitute for the Qutest for office listening?


Mojo doesn't have galvanic isolation, so the Qutest has an advantage there.
However add a pair of Aeon Flow Closed to the Mojo, and it does a fine job with


and many other tracks.


----------



## Chop-Top

miketlse said:


> Mojo doesn't have galvanic isolation


Thanks!  Would the lack of galvanic isolation matter if I do a direct USB feed from a Sony NW-A35?


----------



## miketlse

Chop-Top said:


> Thanks!  Would the lack of galvanic isolation matter if I do a direct USB feed from a Sony NW-A35?


When I used the Mojo a lot, I compared the following:

playing music stored on phone, via a usb cable to Mojo - needed a ferrite core added to usb cable to remove the RFI beeps plus clicks etc. Still left a slight brightness to the music, but some owners do prefer that
playing music stored on Shanling M1, via a usb cable to Mojo - no need for a ferrite core adding to usb cable, and my preferred usb solution instead of the phone

playing music stored on computer, via an optical cable to Mojo - inherent galvanic isolation, and my preferred solution when possible
Your Sony probably represents a similar scenario to the Shanling M1, so the lack of galvanic isolation may not serious issue for you.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Chop-Top

miketlse said:


> Your Sony probably represents a similar scenario to the Shanling M1, so the lack of galvanic isolation may not serious issue for you.
> 
> Hope this helps.


Yes, It Does.  Thanks!


----------



## Qute Beats

A lot of talk of optical cables recently.  I certainly now prefer optical to USB, but is there really a significant difference between cheap plastic fibre and more expensive multi stranded glass?  I get the difference with USB cable quality making a difference and experienced it, as essentially it's still an analogue cable transmitting rising and lowering voltages as 1 and 0s.  But with optical it is a purely digital transmission of light pulses, on or off.  As long as data is transmitted without error, why does cable construction matter?


----------



## Baten

Qute Beats said:


> A lot of talk of optical cables recently.  I certainly now prefer optical to USB, but is there really a significant difference between cheap plastic fibre and more expensive multi stranded glass?  I get the difference with USB cable quality making a difference and experienced it, as essentially it's still an analogue cable transmitting rising and lowering voltages as 1 and 0s.  But with optical it is a purely digital transmission of light pulses, on or off.  As long as data is transmitted without error, why does cable construction matter?


In theory too crappy cable could have wild fluctuations in signal interity etc.

In reality over a reasonable short run pretty much any super cheap super thin cable can do at least 24/96Khz. Only with longer runs or 24/192 the cable quality can start to matter a lot (drop-outs).

But we are all neurotic  so yeah


----------



## Qute Beats

Baten said:


> In theory too ****ty cable could have wild fluctuations in signal interity etc.
> 
> In reality over a reasonable short run pretty much any super cheap super thin cable can do at least 24/96Khz. Only with longer runs or 24/192 the cable quality can start to matter a lot (drop-outs).
> 
> But we are all neurotic  so yeah


Thanks.  Well mine will do 24/192 no issues, so is all good.
Just that some folk say they hear differences between different toslink cables and I don't get why that should be the case.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Thanks.  Well mine will do 24/192 no issues, so is all good.
> Just that some folk say they hear differences between different toslink cables and I don't get why that should be the case.



Actually i heard the same. And specifically heard something special about the lifatec glass toslink. Mine should be reaching sometimes this week. Will let you know how much of an improvement compared to my present toslink im using.


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> Actually i heard the same. And specifically heard something special about the lifatec glass toslink. Mine should be reaching sometimes this week. Will let you know how much of an improvement compared to my present toslink im using.


Please do.  I'm not unwilling to upgrade, but want to be confident it's worth it.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Please do.  I'm not unwilling to upgrade, but want to be confident it's worth it.



Yes, im also on the same boat. Dont have any problem w my present toslink but Ive heard of things on the lifatec, they say the music is smoother running through the lifatec. Will do a/b comparison, i hope there is a significance jump in sound quality. Pls give me some time currently still breakin in the receptacle, amp and speaker cables.


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> Yes, im also on the same boat. Dont have any problem w my present toslink but Ive heard of things on the lifatec, they say the music is smoother running through the lifatec. Will do a/b comparison, i hope there is a significance jump in sound quality. Pls give me some time currently still breakin in the receptacle, amp and speaker cables.


Yes the lifatec is the one that keeps cropping up.  Take all the time you need, thanks again.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Yes the lifatec is the one that keeps cropping up.  Take all the time you need, thanks again.



Anytime.


----------



## kerisabe

Btw I have a question regarding streaming quality using macbook pro running audirvana. Would the quality of streaming be better if the macbook pro is connected through ethernet cable to an airport express extender? Main airport extreme router is in another room. I use a small airport express to a wall plug which runs the ethernet cable to the mbp. Running optical to cut the noise.


----------



## MagnusH

Qute Beats said:


> Thanks.  Well mine will do 24/192 no issues, so is all good.
> Just that some folk say they hear differences between different toslink cables and I don't get why that should be the case.


The reason toslink cables can sound different is because of different amount of jitter that they introduce. Jitter is a time-slot error, simplified: all the bits get there as they should, but not exactly when they should.

I experienced a little smoother higher frequencies with my Lifatec, but the difference wasn't huge. Note that this depends on the DAC as well, and its ability to handle jitter (basically reclock the signal). I have the RME ADI-2 DAC.


----------



## Qute Beats

MagnusH said:


> The reason toslink cables can sound different is because of different amount of jitter that they introduce. Jitter is a time-slot error, simplified: all the bits get there as they should, but not exactly when they should.
> 
> I experienced a little smoother higher frequencies with my Lifatec, but the difference wasn't huge. Note that this depends on the DAC as well, and its ability to handle jitter (basically reclock the signal). I have the RME ADI-2 DAC.


Thanks for that.  Sure I can buy the difference in jitter on the cable being a factor with some DACs and would expect glass to be a better light transmitter, but Rob Watts' designs are jitter free AFAIK, though folk claim a difference with their Qutest.  Just trying to understand.


----------



## MagnusH

Qute Beats said:


> Thanks for that.  Sure I can buy the difference in jitter on the cable being a factor with some DACs and would expect glass to be a better light transmitter, but Rob Watts' designs are jitter free AFAIK, though folk claim a difference with their Qutest.  Just trying to understand.


I don't think any DAC is totally free of jitter (for any input), but some DACs are better at handling it than others.  I think @Rob Watts puts on his "salesmen-cap" from time to time


----------



## heo44 (May 27, 2019)

Nothing


----------



## Deftone

MagnusH said:


> I don't think any DAC is totally free of jitter (for any input), but some DACs are better at handling it than others.  I think @Rob Watts puts on his "salesmen-cap" from time to time



The Chord measurements show impressive jitter suppression just like RME.


----------



## Rob Watts

MagnusH said:


> I don't think any DAC is totally free of jitter (for any input), but some DACs are better at handling it than others.  I think @Rob Watts puts on his "salesmen-cap" from time to time



Hmm - the facts are that you can put 2uS of 1kHz jitter on my DACs via SPDIF and can measure absolutely nothing, down to a FFT noise floor of -180dB. 2uS is a thousand times larger than jitter you would normally encounter on SPDIF.

I don't have a "salesmen-cap". Can you buy one on Amazon?

I am a measurement/objective listening based designer, and am driven entirely upon measurements and carefully controlled listening tests. If I can or can't hear a difference, I post on that. If I measure or can't measure a difference, I post on that. And if I find an observation that contradicts things I have posted before, I post that too. Moreover, Head-Fi posts from people using my designs has been incredibly useful in the past, as people finding sensitivities (X sounds different due to Y and Z), and this has allowed me to investigate issues because of these sensitivities - which then results in better performance from new designs - and I post on that too. But source jitter is for sure not one of these issues.  

As a scientist/design engineer I deal in realities, and am solely driven on one thing - trying to close the gap in reproduced audio from unamplified live sound. And I post on my understanding of those realities; I certainly don't want or need a salesman's hat...


----------



## kerisabe

Rob Watts said:


> Hmm - the facts are that you can put 2uS of 1kHz jitter on my DACs via SPDIF and can measure absolutely nothing, down to a FFT noise floor of -180dB. 2uS is a thousand times larger than jitter you would normally encounter on SPDIF.
> 
> I don't have a "salesmen-cap". Can you buy one on Amazon?
> 
> ...


Well said @Rob Watts thank you for creating qutest I am having a blast!


----------



## Baten

Rob Watts said:


> Hmm - the facts are that you can put 2uS of 1kHz jitter on my DACs via SPDIF and can measure absolutely nothing, down to a FFT noise floor of -180dB. 2uS is a thousand times larger than jitter you would normally encounter on SPDIF.
> 
> I don't have a "salesmen-cap". Can you buy one on Amazon?



Audiosciencereview: no jitter whatsoever
Stereophile measurement: no jitter whatsoever
-180dB seems a little exaggerated though. So you _do_ have a salesman cap


----------



## Triode User

Baten said:


> Audiosciencereview: no jitter whatsoever
> Stereophile measurement: no jitter whatsoever
> -180dB seems a little exaggerated though. So you _do_ have a salesman cap



Have you considered that Rob might have better measuring equipment than the reviewers?


----------



## Baten

Triode User said:


> Have you considered that Rob might have better measuring equipment than the reviewers?


I'm not sure what is better measuring than a $28000 APx555 man  you tell me.

A better argument would be that measurements and highly dependant on the users' settings/config.


----------



## Qute Beats

Rob Watts said:


> Hmm - the facts are that you can put 2uS of 1kHz jitter on my DACs via SPDIF and can measure absolutely nothing, down to a FFT noise floor of -180dB. 2uS is a thousand times larger than jitter you would normally encounter on SPDIF.
> 
> I don't have a "salesmen-cap". Can you buy one on Amazon?
> 
> ...


Thanks Rob, I'm satisfied that jitter is of no concern.
I guess the other issue that could arise would be a poor cable producing data transmission errors, which the DAC can't fix as in the signal already, but this would be clearly audible as clicks or pops AFAIK.  As my cable does not have these issues I conclude that an upgrade is likely not needed (though I will look forward to @kerisabe doing a comparison )


----------



## dac64

Rob Watts said:


> I don't have a "salesmen-cap". Can you buy one on Amazon?
> 
> 
> 
> > No you can't! Trump got it all on his head!


----------



## HumanMedia

Qute Beats said:


> Thanks Rob, I'm satisfied that jitter is of no concern.
> I guess the other issue that could arise would be a poor cable producing data transmission errors, which the DAC can't fix as in the signal already, but this would be clearly audible as clicks or pops AFAIK.  As my cable does not have these issues I conclude that an upgrade is likely not needed (though I will look forward to @kerisabe doing a comparison )



Or maybe, like USB, the tranceivers that interpret the incoming signal generate noise internal to the receiving device, and the harder it is to interpret a jittery signal the more noise they generate. The digital data you hear is reclocked so no jitter there, but is there electrical noise from the tranceivers that can be heard?


----------



## Qute Beats

HumanMedia said:


> Or maybe, like USB, the tranceivers that interpret the incoming signal generate noise internal to the receiving device, and the harder it is to interpret a jittery signal the more noise they generate. The digital data you hear is reclocked so no jitter there, but is there electrical noise from the tranceivers that can be heard?


Or the signal generators inside a general purpose PC, hence why noise reduction gadgets like Jitterbug can work?  More likely that than the receiver in a quality DAC perhaps.  I read folk preferring sound from Mac to Windows PC say.  I put this down to the quality of the internal USB chip doing the work in the PC rather anything to with the OS.  The JCAT USB card is supposed to be very good, though also very expensive.  Same could be said for the optical generator in the device sending the data via toslink presumably.


----------



## dinus777

Hello,
I'm a new member here.
My setup is as follows : Audirvana(Win10)+Tidal -> Intel NUC -> Chord Qutest -> Naim Nait 5si -> ProAc Responce D20r

I'm very happy with Chord Qutest. Recently i noticed that it really has electrical noise , especially if i set amplifier volume at 11 o'clock.  So i purchased Anker 26800 external Power Bank.  I immediately
could hear difference - highs, 3D sound stage, mids  improved by a huge step. Sound stage is more open, more 3d. And no noise.  My brother did same to Chord mojo  -  Anker Power bank and disconnected internal batteries - and he can hear same effect for Mojo also.  

My next step will be change amp to Sugden A21SE Signature or Sugden Masterclass IA-4. And want to try mac mini late 2014 with audirvana instead of Intel Nuc


----------



## Qute Beats

dinus777 said:


> Hello,
> I'm a new member here.
> My setup is as follows : Audirvana(Win10)+Tidal -> Intel NUC -> Chord Qutest -> Naim Nait 5si -> ProAc Responce D20r
> 
> ...


Welcome aboard.  Strange you had noise, I never found any difference between supplied plug and battery, but good you're fixed.  I use the NUC as well, bought especially as music server for its optical output.


----------



## dinus777 (May 28, 2019)

Qute Beats said:


> Welcome aboard.  Strange you had noise, I never found any difference between supplied plug and battery, but good you're fixed.  I use the NUC as well, bought especially as music server for its optical output.



I use NUC6CAYH .  Also looked for optical output. I've tried it with AudioQuest cable, but that only supported 24/96. Today i received sysconcept cable and it should do 24/192. I'll try

As for the noise, this is how i did discover it - after a very low level track , when amp volume was at 10-11 o'lock , i could hear it even from 1meter distance from loudspeaker. Then i've disconnected Chord Qutest original PSU, leaving only Naim 5si  - no noise.  Connected Qutest to Anker Power bank - no noise.  
To my surprise - it not only removed noise, sound changed very much. I was astonished by how much . I never believed in PSU upgrade thing. Now i'm starting to...


----------



## jwbrent

dinus777 said:


> My next step will be change amp to Sugden A21SE Signature or Sugden Masterclass IA-4. And want to try mac mini late 2014 with audirvana instead of Intel Nuc



Big fan of the Sugden A21 series amplifiers. This Class A SS integrated has beautifully rendered trebles. I owned one 20 years ago driving a pair of ProAc Tablette 8 Signatures for my bedroom system ... great memories!


----------



## Zzt231gr

dinus777 said:


> I use NUC6CAYH .  Also looked for optical output. I've tried it with AudioQuest cable, but that only supported 24/96. Today i received sysconcept cable and it should do 24/192. I'll try
> 
> As for the noise, this is how i did discover it - after a very low level track , when amp volume was at 10-11 o'lock , i could hear it even from 1meter distance from loudspeaker. Then i've disconnected Chord Qutest original PSU, leaving only Naim 5si  - no noise.  Connected Qutest to Anker Power bank - no noise.
> To my surprise - it not only removed noise, sound changed very much. I was astonished by how much . I never believed in PSU upgrade thing. Now i'm starting to...


I am not an easy believer,too...
How much did you listen to?Are you sure it is an improvement and not added brightness?Is the sound now softer and calmer?More natural?


----------



## MagnusH

Rob Watts said:


> I don't have a "salesmen-cap". Can you buy one on Amazon?


Seems you don't need it, because you posted a long reply without actually contradicting me. 

Yes, some DACs like your own has very little measureable jitter, but all DACs, including Chord, have jitter. Even with synchronizied clocks for DAC and sender you will get some jitter, and reclocking can only reduce jitter not totally eliminating it. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think you need something more advanced in data transport than SPDIF or USBAudio to fully get rid of jitter (like some packet based transport where the DAC chip packs up and handle everything).

And the practical proof is that toslink cable matters for Chord DACs as well, just not as much as for most other DACs.


----------



## dinus777

Zzt231gr said:


> I am not an easy believer,too...
> How much did you listen to?Are you sure it is an improvement and not added brightness?Is the sound now softer and calmer?More natural?



I have now 2-3weeks Qutest connected to power bank. It is like more of everything in midrange, and cleaner, more precise highs. Better distance between instruments and wider stage. 
amazon fr have now deal of this Anker 26800 , it would be really interesting if someone can buy and also share their experience ....

https://www.amazon.fr/Anker-PowerCore-Batterie-Externe-Capacité/dp/B01JIWQPMW/ref=sr_1_3?__mk_fr_FR=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&keywords=anker+26800&qid=1559114085&s=gateway&sr=8-3


----------



## kerisabe

Actually ive tried connecting qutest to a powerbank and it sounded soft, not enough punch to the sound? So went back to original psu. Lifatec optical is here. Listening now....


----------



## Zzt231gr

kerisabe said:


> Actually ive tried connecting qutest to a powerbank and it sounded soft, not enough punch to the sound? So went back to original psu. Lifatec optical is here. Listening now....





dinus777 said:


> I have now 2-3weeks Qutest connected to power bank. It is like more of everything in midrange, and cleaner, more precise highs. Better distance between instruments and wider stage.
> amazon fr have now deal of this Anker 26800 , it would be really interesting if someone can buy and also share their experience ....
> 
> https://www.amazon.fr/Anker-PowerCore-Batterie-Externe-Capacité/dp/B01JIWQPMW/ref=sr_1_3?__mk_fr_FR=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&keywords=anker+26800&qid=1559114085&s=gateway&sr=8-3


Have you compared it to Poweradd Pilot Pro2?


----------



## FredQc

kerisabe said:


> Actually ive tried connecting qutest to a powerbank and it sounded soft, not enough punch to the sound? So went back to original psu. Lifatec optical is here. Listening now....



I have tried the Anker Powercore II 20100 with the Qutest and what you say here is exactly what I observed. Mudded sound and lack of dynamics compared to original psu...


----------



## kerisabe

Zzt231gr said:


> Have you compared it to Poweradd Pilot Pro2?



I havent but i think id stay put with the stock psu for now.


----------



## kerisabe

Regarding the lifatec optical, id say if youre pretty happy with your current cable the upgrade is not a night and day difference. Yes it is more open and musical, but you really have to really listen to it to notice. Today ive added the active ground conditioner, and the diff is night and day, cleaned up the sound by much! Maybe invest on this first then last the lifatec?


----------



## dinus777

do you have also noise from qutest ? If you set your amp to the volume 10-11 o'clock and qutest powered from stock psu , without any music played, can you hear noise ?


----------



## kerisabe

dinus777 said:


> do you have also noise from qutest ? If you set your amp to the volume 10-11 o'clock and qutest powered from stock psu , without any music played, can you hear noise ?



No. You have to check one by one your components, if any of them is causing that specific symptomp. Is everything well grounded? Preferably for an audio setup, you have a dedicated line for power and grounding separated from the whole house to eliminate as much noise to begin with. Then after deal w the ground loop from the components connected in that dedicated line.


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> Regarding the lifatec optical, id say if youre pretty happy with your current cable the upgrade is not a night and day difference. Yes it is more open and musical, but you really have to really listen to it to notice. Today ive added the active ground conditioner, and the diff is night and day, cleaned up the sound by much! Maybe invest on this first then last the lifatec?


Thanks for cable update.  What's an active ground conditioner and how do you implement?  I use Tacima mains block conditioner with iFi AC purifier inbetween qutest/amp and PC/ext HDD plugs.


----------



## Qute Beats

BTW the most significant upgrade I've made to enjoyment of music from my Qutest was switching form HD650 to AQ Nighthawk, love these 'phones


----------



## kerisabe (May 29, 2019)

Qute Beats said:


> Thanks for cable update.  What's an active ground conditioner and how do you implement?  I use Tacima mains block conditioner with iFi AC purifier inbetween qutest/amp and PC/ext HDD plugs.


Look for brands like Telos or Synergistic Research for ground conditioners. Its another different function than your distributor/conditioner the way it works is the unit will be connected to your components and eliminate detected noise coming from the components. Youll be surprised how much our components, especially the dac produces noise that loops around the system. The dac (which is the qutest in our case) is one of the main culprit of noise. Ive hooked up 2 lines from the ground conditioner to both the qutest’s bnc connectors. One to the int amp’s ground, and to both of my speakers’ negative terminals. The sound of noise in the vocal that i thought was timbre was gone after installing the ground conditioner! Separation was improved by a huge margin and soundstage is wider as well.


----------



## dinus777

Anyone uses sbooster here for Qutest ? https://www.sbooster.com/botw-pp-eco-5v-6v/chord-qutest


----------



## Baten

dinus777 said:


> Anyone uses sbooster here for Qutest ? https://www.sbooster.com/botw-pp-eco-5v-6v/chord-qutest


I had an Sbooster (old version) and sold it fairly quickly since I noticed zero difference with stock psu.

It's not a bad product but nor is the stock psu!


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> Look for brands like Telos or Synergistic Research for ground conditioners. Its another different function than your distributor/conditioner the way it works is the unit will be connected to your components and eliminate detected noise coming from the components. Youll be surprised how much our components, especially the dac produces noise that loops around the system. The dac (which is the qutest in our case) is one of the main culprit of noise. Ive hooked up 2 lines from the ground conditioner to both the qutest’s bnc connectors. One to the int amp’s ground, and to both of my speakers’ negative terminals. The sound of noise in the vocal that i thought was timbre was gone after installing the ground conditioner! Separation was improved by a huge margin and soundstage is wider as well.


I looked up Telos, the  'telos grounding noise reducer' is £5k, more than a Hugo TT2.
https://www.audiocomav.co.uk/av-accessories-/570-telos-grounding-noise-reducer.html


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> I looked up Telos, the  'telos grounding noise reducer' is £5k, more than a Hugo TT2.
> https://www.audiocomav.co.uk/av-accessories-/570-telos-grounding-noise-reducer.html


Its def worth it tho! It does improve your system by a huge margin. It opens up the sound like youve invested in a maybe 3-4x the price of the ground conditioner itself. I was shocked today when adding the ground conditioner one by one to my components. First the qutest, cleared up the vocal and was very noticable then the amp, speakers and last back to the qutest bnc. Will be adding 2 more rca connections tomorrow to the amp and looking forward for some more positive changes to the system.


----------



## kerisabe

@Qute Beats 

Found this interesting article from a lifatec user from: http://forums.audioreview.com/cable...et-job-done-really-inexpensive-too-38941.html

Quoted from the post:

“A few weeks ago I bought a 20" glass Toslink from Lifatec. The adaptor plugs are excellent and snap in perfectly at both ends. Initially I really connected with the mid range textures and low end depth. After a few weeks I have tired of this cable because this particular cable is not particularly adept at delivering some top end sparkle. 

Last night I put on some Jean-Luc Ponty: No Absolute Time. As much as I enjoyed the low end presentation the top end really failed to engage me and if anyone is familiar with this particular piece of music you know how important the top end is throughout this recording. So, today I pulled the plug on the Lifatec and put back the $3.00 Toslink from Belkin. Now playing Lisa Lynne: Hopes & Dreams, and harp notes sound rich and defined as they should be. The overall sound is balanced with the Belkin. 

While I still prefer a Toslink in the mix somewhere the Lifatec is best suited for those who would prefer low end over everything else or for those trying to add warmth to a bright system.”


----------



## kerisabe

@Qute Beats from my personal experience today w the lifatec i dont see the lost in high freq in my system but im also still breaking in my furutech ncf receptacle so maybe that adds alot of brightness in the sound. We’ll see later how the sound turn out, still have 400 hrs to go breaking in the ncf.


----------



## Qute Beats (May 29, 2019)

kerisabe said:


> @Qute Beats from my personal experience today w the lifatec i dont see the lost in high freq in my system but im also still breaking in my furutech ncf receptacle so maybe that adds alot of brightness in the sound. We’ll see later how the sound turn out, still have 400 hrs to go breaking in the ncf.


I'm sure you can sell on the Lifatec easy enough if it continues to not prove itself.  Good luck.  I think I'm sticking with my cheap ebay cable, it has attractive outer braiding after all, though was good to hear your report.
And hope you enjoy the music during that mammoth 400hr brake in.  One this I find as a keen music explorer is that when you listen to lots of new music you don't notice any weakness in the system as much, have fun 

Edit: I read the link you gave, the OP did rather like his cheap Belkin cable, was interesting that he tried a few cheap options, maybe the Belkin is one to try..


----------



## MagnusH

kerisabe said:


> @Qute Beats
> 
> Found this interesting article from a lifatec user from: http://forums.audioreview.com/cable...et-job-done-really-inexpensive-too-38941.html


How much influence, and exactly what influence, a toslink cable has depends a lot of the DAC used. I also find it strange that a optical cable would affect frequency range (a toslink cable can only affect the actual bits and jitter, and jitter don't change frequencies like that).

Added clarity and smoother presentation is what I have experienced when jitter was lessened (the famous "lifted veil"), which was also what I experienced to a small degree when I upgraded a cheap AudioQuest toslink to Lifatec.


----------



## HumanMedia

kerisabe said:


> Its def worth it tho! It does improve your system by a huge margin. It opens up the sound like youve invested in a maybe 3-4x the price of the ground conditioner itself. I was shocked today when adding the ground conditioner one by one to my components. First the qutest, cleared up the vocal and was very noticable then the amp, speakers and last back to the qutest bnc. Will be adding 2 more rca connections tomorrow to the amp and looking forward for some more positive changes to the system.



Interesting stuff. 
I wonder if it’s similar to this strategy and these devices?
https://www.russandrews.com/images/pdf/GroundingMk3.pdf


----------



## kerisabe (May 29, 2019)

HumanMedia said:


> Interesting stuff.
> I wonder if it’s similar to this strategy and these devices?
> https://www.russandrews.com/images/pdf/GroundingMk3.pdf


looks yo be something similar, basically its an “active grounding” device


----------



## kerisabe

MagnusH said:


> How much influence, and exactly what influence, a toslink cable has depends a lot of the DAC used. I also find it strange that a optical cable would affect frequency range (a toslink cable can only affect the actual bits and jitter, and jitter don't change frequencies like that).
> 
> Added clarity and smoother presentation is what I have experienced when jitter was lessened (the famous "lifted veil"), which was also what I experienced to a small degree when I upgraded a cheap AudioQuest toslink to Lifatec.


Yes the difference is not massive, but definitely noticable if you paid really closed attention. As I said, it might be more noticable but just too many breaking in process im doin now, will do a a/b comparison later when everything is settled.


----------



## Ivodam

A question / suggestion to Mr. Watts:

Dear Mr. Watts,

I had the pleasure to visit your company's room at the Hi-End Show in Munich earlier this month.
I was quite curious about the new phono stage called Huei and I have found it to be quite amazing, so I am waiting
impatiently now for the market launch.
As a Qutest owner I was especially glad to find out that you have used practically the same body for Huei,
as for Qutest. I think they will make a nice pair on my rack. 
What I especially liked very much in the design of Huei as compared with Qutest is first, there is a power switch
- I find that very very good; second - Huei has as well balanced outputs. This makes me very happy, since the manufacturer
of my beloved Moon power amp recommends always when possible to use the balanced inputs.
My question would be if you intend to offer us as well balanced outputs with the next version of Qute - whatever the name? And maybe a power switch too would be very agreeable. 

Yours sincerely


----------



## Qute Beats (May 30, 2019)

HumanMedia said:


> Interesting stuff.
> I wonder if it’s similar to this strategy and these devices?
> https://www.russandrews.com/images/pdf/GroundingMk3.pdf


Interesting article with very positive claims.  I'm put off buying from RA again because I tried the Silencer which made no difference (to me), and also a power cord (a freebie with hifi mag subscription) which also did nothing (to me).  I say to me, others may have got benefits, who knows.  The there was this https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/russ-andrews-accessories-ltd-a13-228690.html.  He was later cleared of the charge, but I've have had distrust since.  You can make up your own mind, just putting it out there.

edit: removed word 'apparently' from statement 'was later apparently cleared of the charge.  RA was officialy cleared.


----------



## dac64

Ivodam said:


> A question / suggestion to Mr. Watts:
> 
> Dear Mr. Watts,
> 
> ...



Huei? It will be banned from entering to US market!


----------



## rq1111

Just to share that I have tried recently using handphone power bank to power up my qutest and it works beautifully. Before trying battery, I have tried using ifi products but none of them have good synergy with my hifi system. It sounds muffle and veil instead. So i thought why not try battery. 

I didn't compare the sound using stock psu and power bank but it seems to me that i hear blacker background and good layering using battery power bank.

I believe battery operated is better than any power conditioner so since that day i use battery bank.


----------



## Ivodam

Qute Beats said:


> Welcome aboard.  Strange you had noise, I never found any difference between supplied plug and battery, but good you're fixed.  I use the NUC as well, bought especially as music server for its optical output.



Same with me - I hear no difference between battery power supply and the original charger. But I use a mains filter for my whole system, and this is very likely an explanation for not hearing any difference.


----------



## Ivodam

dac64 said:


> Huei? It will be banned from entering to US market!



Yeah, very funny...


----------



## Zzt231gr

rq1111 said:


> Just to share that I have tried recently using handphone power bank to power up my qutest and it works beautifully. Before trying battery, I have tried using ifi products but none of them have good synergy with my hifi system. It sounds muffle and veil instead. So i thought why not try battery.
> 
> I didn't compare the sound using stock psu and power bank but it seems to me that i hear blacker background and good layering using battery power bank.
> 
> I believe battery operated is better than any power conditioner so since that day i use battery bank.


Generic or of some brand?


----------



## dac64

Ivodam said:


> Yeah, very funny...



I bet trump wasn't able to differciate between Huei and Huawei.


----------



## rq1111

Zzt231gr said:


> Generic or of some brand?



I am using Samsung battery pack.


----------



## OctavianH

What interconnects are you using? I was thinking about an upgrade since the Chord Clearway I currently have sound somehow dark to me and seem to have recessed highs.


----------



## kerisabe

OctavianH said:


> What interconnects are you using? I was thinking about an upgrade since the Chord Clearway I currently have sound somehow dark to me and seem to have recessed highs.



Vermouth Audio’s black pearl mkii interconnects.


----------



## kerisabe

The other day, Ive tried switching from using optical input (lifatec glass cable) on the qutest back to its usb input (atlas usb element se cable w no decrapifier). Wanted to try again dsd upsampling of audirvana. Boy was I wrong, the optical input sound is so far better sounding than the usb input. The optical input sounds very clean and alive. The usb input sounds like it doesnt have focus, not clean and tight. The high freq sounds super bright where the optical input really toned down the high freq but still w alot of details. I think im good for now just running tidal at 24/96 it sounds way better than my usb input upsampled. Maybe its my usb cable and no use of decrapifier.


----------



## dac64

kerisabe said:


> The other day, Ive tried switching from using optical input (lifatec glass cable) on the qutest back to its usb input (atlas usb element se cable w no decrapifier). Wanted to try again dsd upsampling of audirvana. Boy was I wrong, the optical input sound is so far better sounding than the usb input. The optical input sounds very clean and alive. The usb input sounds like it doesnt have focus, not clean and tight. The high freq sounds super bright where the optical input really toned down the high freq but still w alot of details. I think im good for now just running tidal at 24/96 it sounds way better than my usb input upsampled. Maybe its my usb cable and no use of decrapifier.



I've the same experiences. Just a little movement to the USB plug, the sound stage was changed. I suspect the USB interface wasn't reliable as compared optical.


----------



## Deftone

kerisabe said:


> The other day, Ive tried switching from using optical input (lifatec glass cable) on the qutest back to its usb input (atlas usb element se cable w no decrapifier). Wanted to try again dsd upsampling of audirvana. Boy was I wrong, the optical input sound is so far better sounding than the usb input. The optical input sounds very clean and alive. The usb input sounds like it doesnt have focus, not clean and tight. The high freq sounds super bright where the optical input really toned down the high freq but still w alot of details. I think im good for now just running tidal at 24/96 it sounds way better than my usb input upsampled. Maybe its my usb cable and no use of decrapifier.



You should let the Qutest do all the upsampling anyway so feed native files.


----------



## kerisabe

Deftone said:


> You should let the Qutest do all the upsampling anyway so feed native files.



Ok well noted will do your suggestion. Thank you


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Also, if you use Tidal - enable an MQA passthrough and disable software "first unfold" option. Somehow, Qutest without MQA support sounds better on it`s own..


----------



## kerisabe

Ragnar-BY said:


> Also, if you use Tidal - enable an MQA passthrough and disable software "first unfold" option. Somehow, Qutest without MQA support sounds better on it`s own..



Can u post some shots of the menu option on audirvana? Thanks


----------



## kerisabe

Ragnar-BY said:


> Also, if you use Tidal - enable an MQA passthrough and disable software "first unfold" option. Somehow, Qutest without MQA support sounds better on it`s own..



The connection I use from macbook pro (running tidal on audirvana), optical to dac. I turned off auto mqa detection, then set dac as mqa renderer. Is that the correct way to set mqa passthrough from the mbp’s optical output to the qutest?


----------



## kerisabe

@Ragnar-BY figured it out! Optical should be set to integer 24-96 which is the max output of the mbp toslink output. The previous settings ive posted created alot of noise setting the mbp’s built in output as mqa renderer, now sound is back to clean. The previous settings made it sound like usb connection from the mbp to the qutest


----------



## kerisabe

Another thing that i just did some A/B testing, wifi/lan connection streaming tidal via audirvana. LAN is way cleaner, music is more solid. My room is far from the main airport extreme so im using an airport express and some generic lan cable with both ends covered with stillpoints ers.


----------



## kerisabe

Found this interesting article regarding A/B testing of ethernet cables (connection between airport express to streamer).


----------



## MagnusH (Jun 10, 2019)

Ethernet cables transport electronic noise as well, which will affect the sound. So that "theory" they keep talking about is not very accurate. Unlike USBAudio or SPDIF, there is no audio-jitter in ethernet though (the information transported is not tied to a clock), which means that the quality of ethernet cables is not as important as for USB.


----------



## kerisabe (Jun 10, 2019)

MagnusH said:


> Ethernet cables transport electronic noise as well, which will affect the sound. So that "theory" they keep talking about is not very accurate. Unlike USBAudio or SPDIF, there is no audio-jitter in ethernet though (the information transported is not tied to a clock), which means that the quality of ethernet cables is not as important as for USB.



Im actually running generic ethernet cable from my airport express to macbook pro and that gives better fuller sound compared to using wifi. Im eager to try a better ethernet cable like the wireworld starlight cat8 or wireworld platinum, sotm, purist?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. The current setup of network is (cable modem)
—> generic ethernet cable —> airport extreme —> airport express (audio room) —> generic ethernet cable (covered the ends with stillpoints ers) —> macbook pro.


----------



## kerisabe

Also I thought the use of optical connection to the chord qutest eliminated ground loop which translates to clean sound. But to my surprise, the addition of ground box line to one of the mbp’s usb cleaned the sound more. Ive also carefully eliminated the standard hdd drive and replaced it with an ssd drive fully covered w stillpoints ers, also added small cuts on top of the chips inside the logicboard and that gave even cleaner sound on top of everything. And disconnecting the power adaptor (running off the internal battery) also give cleaner sound.  This must have something to do with the cleaner data/signal conversion in the mbp before it got translated into the toslink signal.  I will try to add another line from the ground box to the other usb input on the mbp and see if that will further improve the sound.


----------



## kerisabe

Deftone said:


> You should let the Qutest do all the upsampling anyway so feed native files.



Btw thanks for the suggestion. After been listening to upconverted music through audirvana (24/96), ive deactivated the upconversion and it sounds cleaner/tighter/more air now (even with down converted mqa files to 24/96 from 24/192; old mbp toslink limit) . Thanks again.


----------



## HumanMedia

And dont forget the noise generated by the tranceivers, which have to do the work in that incredibly complex PHY layer to convert those analog pulses into digital data. In USB tranceivers this can add 20db+ of noise in the 8hkz region. In ethernet?


----------



## kerisabe (Jun 11, 2019)

HumanMedia said:


> And dont forget the noise generated by the tranceivers, which have to do the work in that incredibly complex PHY layer to convert those analog pulses into digital data. In USB tranceivers this can add 20db+ of noise in the 8hkz region. In ethernet?



You might find the answer in this article, https://kenrockwell.com/apple/airport-express-audio-quality-2014.htm

Ive changed around the connection today in my system. Took out the wifi/bluetooth module and put more sp ers on the other side of logic board.





Then from the main fiber optic model, ive changed the generic ethernet cable with a cat7 cable w 4 separated lines design connected to the airport extreme. Then from the airport extreme using the same cat7 cable direct to my 2010 mbp, mini toslink - toslink lifatec glass cable to qutest. It seems like there is more air in the sound, but ive also notice its not as black? Maybe its the noise?

Im thinking about changing the setup next time to: airport extreme via ethernet to mbp. Then mbp output set to “airplay”’to another airport extreme in my audio room, then from that airport extreme to qutest via its mini toslink output to qutest. Will post how it turns out. I will be adding another grounding box line to my mbp’s usb input. Currently installed 2 bnc grounding lines on the qutest and it really reduced the noise in the sound by a mile. (Also installed sp ers inside the top/bottom cover of qutest)


----------



## Baten

kerisabe said:


> You might find the answer in this article, https://kenrockwell.com/apple/airport-express-audio-quality-2014.htm
> 
> Ive changed around the connection today in my system. Took out the wifi/bluetooth module and put more sp ers on the other side of logic board.
> 
> ...


Are you a bat?? All that effort 

I can't hear any noise on qutest


----------



## kerisabe

Baten said:


> Are you a bat?? All that effort
> 
> I can't hear any noise on qutest





Whats your qutest setup?


----------



## Qute Beats

kerisabe said:


> You might find the answer in this article, https://kenrockwell.com/apple/airport-express-audio-quality-2014.htm
> 
> Ive changed around the connection today in my system. Took out the wifi/bluetooth module and put more sp ers on the other side of logic board.
> 
> ...


Just curious because of all the effort you've gone too, did you try Hugo TT2 or Dave prior to Qutest purchase?  Higher up the range the Chord products have better analogue stages and I do wonder if an upgrade is more useful than lots of Qutest tweaks, not that it's not an admirable pursuit to squeeze as much out of Qutest as possible of course


----------



## Qute Beats

General question: does opening up Qutest void warranty?


----------



## Deftone

Qute Beats said:


> General question: does opening up Qutest void warranty?



opening it up wouldnt but any tinkering and modding would.


----------



## maxh22

kerisabe said:


> You might find the answer in this article, https://kenrockwell.com/apple/airport-express-audio-quality-2014.htm
> 
> Ive changed around the connection today in my system. Took out the wifi/bluetooth module and put more sp ers on the other side of logic board.
> 
> ...



Why go through the effort of physically taking out the WiFi/Bluetooth chip when one could simply just turn it off in settings?


----------



## maxh22

Also regarding the lifeatec and hearing more air, I once thought that too. Eventually the sound become brittle and harsh and that’s when I noticed the connector was not fully inserted. You should hear a click when it’s fully inserted.


----------



## kerisabe (Jun 11, 2019)

maxh22 said:


> Why go through the effort of physically taking out the WiFi/Bluetooth chip when one could simply just turn it off in settings?



So i can isolate things i dont use, and also the connectors. From what ive learned there are a lot of power switchings inside the mbp for the components. So tryin to eliminate as much unused components as possible and covered up/plugged off those connections.


----------



## kerisabe

maxh22 said:


> Also regarding the lifeatec and hearing more air, I once thought that too. Eventually the sound become brittle and harsh and that’s when I noticed the connector was not fully inserted. You should hear a click when it’s fully inserted.



Thats correct, the toslink connector needs to click into the qutest’s optical input.


----------



## kerisabe

No more direct lan connection from airport extreme to mbp. So wifi from airport extreme to the room via an airport express (floating ground + connected to the active grounding unit via it’s 3.5mm jack) —> lan to mbp. Major improvement in reducing noise from its internal switching psu and disconnecting from lan grounding from the router. Will move one of the bnc line from one off qutest’s bnc input to the mbp second usb input. Also will be adding more active grounding box line to the airport express’ usb input. Mpb’s bigger logic board compared to qutest (more noise creation). But very happy with the sound now.


----------



## Zzt231gr

So,did anybody compared Lifatec optical cable vs another decent one??


----------



## 474194

Zzt231gr said:


> So,did anybody compared Lifatec optical cable vs another decent one??



Hugo2 user here.  I come in peace.

I ordered the Lifatec Plastic (POF) for future experiments, but ended up preferring it over the glass for some reason.  It's not worth it to return the glass, but if my glass gives out; going with the POF going forward.  It plays 24/192 and 1-bit just fine.

But my use case is portable... so YMMV.  Hoping it's just a case of needing more brain burn-in with the glass...



 

My build:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/yet...alternative-to-2go-poly.905925/#post-15004881


----------



## kerisabe

Zzt231gr said:


> So,did anybody compared Lifatec optical cable vs another decent one??



Not sure about another decent one, only thing ive compared to is the EMK fiber optical which ive purchased suggested by my local audio shop. I prefer the glass lifatec, no more clicks and smoother compared to the EMK fiber.


----------



## Zzt231gr

AC-12 said:


> Hugo2 user here.  I come in peace.
> 
> I ordered the Lifatec Plastic (POF) for future experiments, but ended up preferring it over the glass for some reason.  It's not worth it to return the glass, but if my glass gives out; going with the POF going forward.  It plays 24/192 and 1-bit just fine.
> 
> ...



In peace we accept you!

I use a Belkin POF,too.



kerisabe said:


> Not sure about another decent one, only thing ive compared to is the EMK fiber optical which ive purchased suggested by my local audio shop. I prefer the glass lifatec, no more clicks and smoother compared to the EMK fiber.


The clicks are not a cable quality issue.It is a problematic connection.


----------



## kerisabe

Zzt231gr said:


> In peace we accept you!
> 
> I use a Belkin POF,too.
> 
> The clicks are not a cable quality issue.It is a problematic connection.


The clicks come when transmitting certain bitrates, and the emk was pretty much brand new when it did it. Made sure connection clicked and clean. Never had it once the lifatec was installed.


----------



## 474194

Zzt231gr said:


> In peace we accept you!
> 
> I use a Belkin POF,too.
> 
> The clicks are not a cable quality issue.It is a problematic connection.



Cheers!  I just re-tested.  Glass wins out.  No graniness like with the POF.  Cannot go wrong with the Lifatec glass.  It's a bigger difference than my initial impressions.  Taking back my statement.  I prefer glass > POF.


----------



## Zzt231gr

AC-12 said:


> Cheers!  I just re-tested.  Glass wins out.  No graniness like with the POF.  Cannot go wrong with the Lifatec glass.  It's a bigger difference than my initial impressions.  Taking back my statement.  I prefer glass > POF.


Is the difference worth the price?Is it noticeable easily?


----------



## Joe-Siow

Zzt231gr said:


> Is the difference worth the price?Is it noticeable easily?



Can't speak for others, but the difference was quite noticeable to me


----------



## Zzt231gr

Joe-Siow said:


> Can't speak for others, but the difference was quite noticeable to me


If the difference is the same or better when you change from coaxial to optical,it's definately worth it!

Anyone knows a European dealer?


----------



## kerisabe

@Zzt231gr 

This article can be a good read regarding the lifatec: 

https://www.audioasylum.com/message...glass-optisilk-mini-toslink-to-toslink-report

I believe the raw material of the lifatec glass toslink is manufactured in germany for medical use. Lifatec USA is the company who manufactures the cable for audio use.


----------



## Zzt231gr

kerisabe said:


> @Zzt231gr
> 
> This article can be a good read regarding the lifatec:
> 
> ...


Thank you.I will read it later when I will finish work.

The thing is,I haven't read a single negative review on this cable so far.The hype must be real.


----------



## jwbrent

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you.I will read it later when I will finish work.
> 
> The thing is,I haven't read a single negative review on this cable so far.The hype must be real.



I used a Lifatec back when I owned the original Hugo, and it was the best sounding toslink I’ve ever used. I’m glad it passes 24/192 now.


----------



## kerisabe

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you.I will read it later when I will finish work.
> 
> The thing is,I haven't read a single negative review on this cable so far.The hype must be real.



No problem, you wont be disappointed once you installed the lifatec in your system


----------



## 474194 (Jun 14, 2019)

Zzt231gr said:


> Is the difference worth the price?Is it noticeable easily?



My sample size is small since my optimised source is only a few weeks old, but I would have to say it is worth the price.  There was a good amount of difference when I swapped the Lifatec POF with the Lifatec Glass.  I wasn't expecting the difference as the POF was quite enjoyable when I recently unboxed.  There was a week gap between receiving both products, so only yesterday did I get around to testing them both at the same time.

I think the Lifatec Glass and the HiFiBerry (Switzerland) Digi+ Pro should be a standard starter kit for Qutest/Hugo2 owners.  The High-End Chord can have their fun with the 4-digit price sources, but both these products represent a solid value for our target group.  The Digi+ Pro plus a Raspberry Pi plus a case is actually less than a Lifatec Glass with shipping.

For the Lifatec Glass, you are looking at around $30 shipping I estimate.  You will probably pay less than I as I had to pay $35 to re-terminate plus shipping fees back and forth.

With this optimised source, RBCD does it for me now.  Before I could not get into CDs and only SACDs provided that magic.  Now I'm redisocovering CDs.  I think it's the synergy of a quality dedicated source plus the Lifatec.  So this alone makes it well worth the price.

With the HiFiBerry source, the supplied Chord Toslink played 192 and 1-bit fine.  No problems either with the Lifatec POF or Lifatec Glass.  I converted 192 and DSD both to WAV since WAV is just a container.  The Hugo2 displayed a blue light for the 192 and white light for DSD off WAV native files. 






https://www.hifiberry.com/shop/boards/hifiberry-digi-pro/

https://www.hifiberry.com/shop/accessories/raspberry-pi-3bp/

https://www.hifiberry.com/shop/cases/universal-case-black/


----------



## jbarrentine

Zzt231gr said:


> Is the difference worth the price?Is it noticeable easily?



I personally noticed it quite easily.


----------



## Zzt231gr

jbarrentine said:


> I personally noticed it quite easily.


Thanks,I am buying it in the near future!


----------



## jbarrentine

Zzt231gr said:


> Thanks,I am buying it in the near future!



It really is worth it. plus, it feels like silk


----------



## Chop-Top

This is turning into a Lifatec love fest


----------



## Qute Beats

Praise for Lifatec heating up - I was asking about this a little while back and we ruled out any cable effect on jitter with the Qutest, so what is it that can make one Toslink cable sound better than another, given as I understand it, it's a purely digital transmission?  There must be some physical effect taking place - anyone able to explain what's going on?  Thanks!


----------



## MagnusH

Qute Beats said:


> Praise for Lifatec heating up - I was asking about this a little while back and we ruled out any cable effect on jitter with the Qutest, so what is it that can make one Toslink cable sound better than another, given as I understand it, it's a purely digital transmission?  There must be some physical effect taking place - anyone able to explain what's going on?  Thanks!


Toslink cables causes different amount of jitter, and no DAC removes all jitter, only lessens the effect. So even with a Chord DAC you get some benefit from a better toslink cable.


----------



## Qute Beats

MagnusH said:


> Toslink cables causes different amount of jitter, and no DAC removes all jitter, only lessens the effect. So even with a Chord DAC you get some benefit from a better toslink cable.


I certainly read about differing jitter with different cables.  But other than jitter, are there other effects at play I wonder?  An obvious one I guess is the efficiency of light transmission, with plastic fibre perhaps not being as transparent and absorbing some tiny amounts of the energy and converting it to heat.   Probably discussed before but my memory is a bit mushy today..


----------



## Deftone

MagnusH said:


> Toslink cables causes different amount of jitter, and* no DAC removes all jitter*, only lessens the effect. So even with a Chord DAC you get some benefit from a better toslink cable.



Are you sure about that?


----------



## digitaldufferme

jwbrent said:


> I’m in the same boat. I’m using a 6 year old MacBook Air as a bridge for my music files stored on an external hard drive and my Qutest. The new Project has caught my eye since its at the price point I’m looking to spend. With that said, I just learned about the new Stack Audio Link made in Britain and it looks pretty sweet, so I’m waiting for it to be released.
> 
> Stack Audio


Hi I'm a retiree who took a leap of faith in a small business. I did extensive research on an affordable option for an audio streamer. Like a fair number of people in the hobby my age, I don't have extensive IT knowledge so a standard Pi based streamer wasn't an option. After seeing a long and complimentary YouTube video review from Hans Beekhuyzen, on the Stach Audio The Link Audio Streamer I contacted Theo of Stack Audio via email with product enquiries. He was very responsive in our extended dialogue, replying within 24 hours each time. He was very helpful and encouraging. I made a purchase and had a unit delivered to Singapore. The unit is very well constructed and setting it up was not difficult EXCEPT that it WON'T LOG into SPOTIFY. It streams from TIDAL and my PC and a USB drive beautifully. I have made repeated email requests for help from THEO and he does not help. He answers only after about a week or more saying he will respond the next day but never does. He has now stopped answering at all! As a retiree, funds for my hobby are hard to come by. I am deeply disappointed in Theo and his abysmal service attitude. I would warn off all potential buyers NOT to buy the Audio Link Streamer as it does not function correctly and worse still, the after sales service is non existent. I will be warning off other would be customers on all channels or posts I can find online to protect others against his business practices.


----------



## digitaldufferme (Jun 18, 2019)

Malmbak said:


> Hey! I’m building a system from scratch and now only lack a streamer. I’m have the Qutest obviously and would really like to hear anyone from anyone who uses the Innuous ZenMini mk3 or the Stream Box S2 Ultra fra Pro-ject? Optimally someone has auditioned both and can offer their advice. I can live with either from a practical standpoint, so I’m mostly interested in their SQ and synergy with Qutest.
> 
> Thanks a bunch


.


----------



## MagnusH

Deftone said:


> Are you sure about that?


Yes, I am pretty sure. But it might remove enough not to show up on a measurment of a 12khz testtone, so if I liked to listen to sine-wave testtones all day I would be happy to use a plastic cable


----------



## 474194 (Jun 18, 2019)

.


----------



## digitaldufferme

AC-12 said:


> Thanks for the info.  Will stay away from that product.  Not a fan of proprietary solutions and all the marketing mumbo jumbo in general, but I understand the tech can be overwhelming if you are trying to go the Raspberry Pi route.
> 
> Hope someone looks into the Spotify issue...


The issue is being resolved by Stack Audio to my satisfaction. The owner is now trying very hard to give me an equitable solution. This was an internal glitch in a small business and I don't want it to suffer disproportionately. I hope you will delete your post so an unhappy but one off incident does not spread on this or other forum threads. Cheers mate.


----------



## 474194

^^ Done... Glad things worked out...

I recommend you edit out my reply on your post #3997.


----------



## Lodwales81 (Jun 18, 2019)

Can anyone advise if my qutest would match a pair of klipsch heresy III speakers, at the moment I have a tube amp connected to some DALI OPTICON 1's.


----------



## Daniel Johnston

Lodwales81 said:


> Can anyone advise if my qutest would match a pair of klipsch heresy III speakers, at the moment I have a tube amp connected to some DALI OPTICON 1's.



Mojo sounds great on Klipsch RF7 II and PrimaLuna dialogue HP. Qutest is a better DAC. I’m betting (and hopefully soon getting) It’ll be a great pairing.


----------



## Qute Beats

Moved my Qutest to the TV for the 1st time this weekend while watching Glastonbury coverage.  Sounds real nice via the Sony TVs optical out.  Mightily enjoyed The Cure's set.


----------



## cotic54

Hello everyone on Head-fi ,

This is my first post here but I have lurked and followed the various Chord product threads. A couple of months ago I took the plunge, and am very pleased with my M-scaler/Quetest combo.
I would like to echo the praise from many of the posters about the Chord range, for anyone thinking about a purchase I have found many of the comments on these pages to be true and accurate when describing what you can expect from these DACs and the M-scaler.
 I would like some advice as since installation I have many pauses in playback due to my fridge, light switches, plugs etc I realise this is not any problem with the units themselves and am wondering what product would cure the problem. I found this possibility for the Quetest, but am not sure if the electrical interference will still get through.
https://www.audiophonics.fr/fr/alim...e-bruit-usb-220v-vers-5v-2a-25va-p-11364.html
Another option could be this battery pack but I,m not sold on the idea of having to recharge every couple of days.
https://www.large.net/product/8eu43d3.html
 Any advice on possible solutions?

Thanks .


----------



## Zzt231gr

cotic54 said:


> Hello everyone on Head-fi ,
> 
> This is my first post here but I have lurked and followed the various Chord product threads. A couple of months ago I took the plunge, and am very pleased with my M-scaler/Quetest combo.
> I would like to echo the praise from many of the posters about the Chord range, for anyone thinking about a purchase I have found many of the comments on these pages to be true and accurate when describing what you can expect from these DACs and the M-scaler.
> ...


Welcome!

I  personally find both of your solutions average quality at best.And then,linear supplys for Qutest don't seem to work...

I would invest in a good powerbank eg. Poweradd Pilot Pro2,which many people seem to have success in the audio quality,too!


----------



## kerisabe

cotic54 said:


> Hello everyone on Head-fi ,
> 
> This is my first post here but I have lurked and followed the various Chord product threads. A couple of months ago I took the plunge, and am very pleased with my M-scaler/Quetest combo.
> I would like to echo the praise from many of the posters about the Chord range, for anyone thinking about a purchase I have found many of the comments on these pages to be true and accurate when describing what you can expect from these DACs and the M-scaler.
> ...



I would invest in installing a dedicated line from your main panel for your audio system.


----------



## dinus777

cotic54 said:


> Hello everyone on Head-fi ,
> 
> This is my first post here but I have lurked and followed the various Chord product threads. A couple of months ago I took the plunge, and am very pleased with my M-scaler/Quetest combo.
> I would like to echo the praise from many of the posters about the Chord range, for anyone thinking about a purchase I have found many of the comments on these pages to be true and accurate when describing what you can expect from these DACs and the M-scaler.
> ...




Hi,

Welcome on board.  I also have similar problems, but in my case - i hear a lot of electrical noise ( e.g. if i set amplifier volume at 11 o'clock, Qutest output 2V ). It turned out to be coming from mains electrical line.  I've tried with Anker PowerCore 26800 , it does not only removed noise, but it changed sound of Qutest - everything is even more separated in mid range, voises are pushed in front.

I'm thinking of bying Sbooster BOTW P&P ECO 5-6V MKII for Chord Qutest. It is linear PSU.

I found a review here with Chord Qutest 

https://blog.artsexcellence.nl/sbooster-botw-eco-mkii-review/


----------



## Zzt231gr

dinus777 said:


> everything is even more separated in mid range, voises are pushed in front.


Are you sure this isn't brightness?


----------



## Qute Beats

cotic54 said:


> Hello everyone on Head-fi ,
> 
> This is my first post here but I have lurked and followed the various Chord product threads. A couple of months ago I took the plunge, and am very pleased with my M-scaler/Quetest combo.
> I would like to echo the praise from many of the posters about the Chord range, for anyone thinking about a purchase I have found many of the comments on these pages to be true and accurate when describing what you can expect from these DACs and the M-scaler.
> ...


Actual interruptions to the music sounds quite severe.  I've never had such a problem and like kerisabe said above a dedicated power line should fix, but may not be practical.  A battery would do the trick, but if using usb/coaxial connection you still have an electrical connection from you source, so also try an optical link if you can.  Failing that a power conditioner should improve things.  I use iFi's AC Puifier to quieten down mains noise, not expensive and you could sell on or return if not doing what you want.


----------



## dinus777

Zzt231gr said:


> Are you sure this isn't brightness?



i think i'm sure. And the sound is just somehow cleaner, cleaner highs as well, without harshness. And in midrange more details, better separation, depth between instruments, and voises pushed front. This is how i feel it with my system : Audirvana 3.5 + Mac mini late 2014 + Sysconcept optical + Qutest + Naim 5SI + ProAC D20R


----------



## Zzt231gr

dinus777 said:


> i think i'm sure. And the sound is just somehow cleaner, cleaner highs as well, without harshness. And in midrange more details, better separation, depth between instruments, and voises pushed front. This is how i feel it with my system : Audirvana 3.5 + Mac mini late 2014 + Sysconcept optical + Qutest + Naim 5SI + ProAC D20R


Sounds like a noticeable improvement!I think I must give it a try...


----------



## Chop-Top

dinus777 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm thinking of bying Sbooster BOTW P&P ECO 5-6V MKII for Chord Qutest. It is linear PS



Try this first...Jameco 1953612


----------



## ra990 (Jul 4, 2019)

I believe Rob Watts has recommended a good battery pack over linear PS (the linear PS will also void warranty). 

What does a linear PS get you that the battery won't, other than alleviating the need to recharge the battery every once in a while?


----------



## Chop-Top

ra990 said:


> I believe Rob Watts has recommended a good battery pack over linear PS (the linear PS will also void warranty).





Rob Watts said:


> If the attached PSU meets USB specifications then you will not void the warranty - I just checked with Matt from Chord about this.


----------



## Joe-Siow

Pretty sure using an LPS does not void the Qutest; it is not stated on the manual

However, the opposite is true for the M Scaler with Chord stating pretty clearly on the manual on the manual that any PSU other than the stock on will void the warranty


----------



## odessamarin

ra990 said:


> What does a linear PS get you that the battery won't, other than alleviating the need to recharge the battery every once in a while?



I am also thought this way, but it's not that simple.
Power bank inside will have circuit to stabilize 5V from LI-Ion..
And in many cases it's crap.. a lot of noise and non linearity. At the end it was deigned to recharge our gadgets and not for hi-fi audio components.
So, not that easy... still good switching supply or LPS is the way to go here.
I heard many good words about this.. and it costs nothing.



https://www.amazon.com/s?k=MeanWell,+RS-15-5&ref=nb_sb_noss_2


----------



## Ragnar-BY

cotic54 said:


> I would like some advice as since installation I have many pauses in playback due to my fridge, light switches, plugs etc I realise this is not any problem with the units themselves and am wondering what product would cure the problem. I found this possibility for the Quetest, but am not sure if the electrical interference will still get through.
> https://www.audiophonics.fr/fr/alim...e-bruit-usb-220v-vers-5v-2a-25va-p-11364.html
> Another option could be this battery pack but I,m not sold on the idea of having to recharge every couple of days.
> https://www.large.net/product/8eu43d3.html
> Any advice on possible solutions?


You can try this thing:
https://www.russandrews.com/eu/x4-block-euro/
Russ offers 60 days moneyback, so you can try and see if it helps. I have Russ Andrews X6 and it had great effect on Qutest`s sound.


----------



## odessamarin

cotic54 said:


> I would like some advice as since installation I have many pauses in playback due to my fridge, light switches, plugs etc


It's likely problem with coax (BNC) connection it this case. Can you try optical input and see if it's better? pauses should gone.
If so, then i would try other digital cable maybe, if you need coax interface.
Other thing to check how good grounds connected in your gears..


----------



## cotic54

Thanks for all your replys and suggestions this really is a great forum.

I would like to describe my system and power supplies in some more detail as this may be useful to get to the bottom of this problem.

Firstly my system comprises of a Modwright Oppo 205 which has the TV and computer (for Amazon prime) fed through it, all music is CD direct from Oppo, digital coaxial cable out, M- scaler connected with supplied cables into Quetest- ARC REF3 preamp with one SE output split to Croft 7R monoblocks for 
bass section of T Gravsen DTQWT III speakers and an Elekit 8100 flea watt amp driving the MT section of the DTQWT III speakers, the second SE output from the REF3 drives the rear speakers using a Quad 606.
When the M-scaler and Quetest are not in the chain the pauses in play back disappear.

Power supplies are two cables direct from the consumer unit one into a Furman conditioner and the other to a standard power strip, both of these have a 20 amp switches connected so the system can be switched on using just two switches ( high WAF) .

A while ago a third direct line was added for the REF 3 as I started to get brown outs which were detected by the REF3 and it would automatically shut down, I installed a Sollatek voltage stabilizer for the REF3 which cured the problem , I did try the Quetest and M-scaler conected to the Solatek but it made no difference. 
None of the things which cause these pauses in playback are on the HIFI eletrical circuit but everything that causes the pauses is in close proximity, for example the fridge nearest the system (other side of partiton wall) is the one that causes pauses, the house is divided into our living area, a studio and a two bed apartment so on site we have 7 fridges and freezers in total . The light switches which cause pauses in playback are also the closest ones to the system, when tennants are in they must be using light switches but they do not cause problems.

From the suggestions so far I am thinking of going from least expensive upwards to see what happens.

 I have ordered an optical cable as a lets see if it works (nice 'n' cheap), if no dice there i'll try the 5V battery next. Some time ago I had a borrowed Hugo TT with its internal battery and experienced no problems either with or without it plugged into the mains, so I would like to ask those of you who use a battery pack if you leave it on trickle charge whilst it is being used or is it always drained then recharged. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Hugo TT worked from the battery all the time and it made no difference if it was plugged into the wall (may be wrong about that), I certainly could not detect a difference in sound quality either way, and the owner said likewise.  My concerns are to get rid of the problem and have an easy to use wife friendly system (no battery charging if possible) if I get sound improvements in SQ they are a bonus .

If all the above fails then I guess I'm left with the PSU option ( most expensive).

Thanks again for all your input I shall let you know what works and if anyone has an A'HA moment from any of the info above  please post it up.


----------



## odessamarin

My TT is always connected to adapter..


----------



## Ragnar-BY

@cotic54 

Well, Furman should be ok. Although, it’s strange that with power filter and voltage stabilizer you still have your gear reacting to lights and everything. The fact that different parts of your system are powered by separate power lines - might be not ok.

If I were you, I would try to:
- buy better BNC cables. Most obvious thing. Some of owners here, including me, had different cable related issues with the stock cables.
- ground all components to one point

A test with optical between M Scaler and DAC, suggested by odessamarin, is a good way to understand if stock cables causes the problem.


----------



## kerisabe

@cotic54 

Your light switch scenario actually is happening w me as well in my bedroom tv setup. Thats why ive suggested a dedicated power line for your system. The reason these things happen, it might be the electrician’s mistake, the lines of that particular switch/fridge crosses, or in the same main electricity line with the one used for your audio. They need to be “separated”.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Mr. Rob,
I have my cd transport connected via optical at my Qutest.I am thinking of adding my PS4 through an optical adapter to one of the BNC inputs.Will this connection deteriorate the sound I hear from my transport?

I mean,will this connection add noise or distortion to the unit when it is not selected?

Thank you in advance!


----------



## Rob Watts

If it locks you are good to go. I have used optical switchers before and they work well. I can't see it degrading the sound, but you can always do an AB listening test to make sure.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> If it locks you are good to go. I have used optical switchers before and they work well. I can't see it degrading the sound, but you can always do an AB listening test to make sure.


Thank you,but I think I didn't explain correctly.

The Playstation will be connected via BNC to Qutest.Will this connection affect the sound from my CD transport when I listen to it(connected through optical)?I mean,will it add grounding noise to my optical input?


----------



## jwbrent

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you,but I think I didn't explain correctly.
> 
> The Playstation will be connected via BNC to Qutest.Will this connection affect the sound from my CD transport when I listen to it(connected through optical)?I mean,will it add grounding noise to my optical input?



I wouldn’t think so since optical is immune from such disturbances.


----------



## Rob Watts

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you,but I think I didn't explain correctly.
> 
> The Playstation will be connected via BNC to Qutest.Will this connection affect the sound from my CD transport when I listen to it(connected through optical)?I mean,will it add grounding noise to my optical input?



It depends upon the optical to coax adaptor - if it's battery powered, I wouldn't worry. A mains powered device will set-up ground loops via the PSU and so could have an influence on your overall RF noise levels, thus making it brighter than it should be.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> It depends upon the optical to coax adaptor - if it's battery powered, I wouldn't worry. A mains powered device will set-up ground loops via the PSU and so could have an influence on your overall RF noise levels, thus making it brighter than it should be.


Thank you,sir!

I imagined something like this...It is mains powered.I will disconnect it when I won't be using it for the peace of mind and all will be well!


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Jul 6, 2019)

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you,sir!
> 
> I imagined something like this...It is mains powered.I will disconnect it when I won't be using it for the peace of mind and all will be well!



Deleted previous comment, yes I think you are correct that if you disconnect the converter from the mains then there will be no ground loop, but others can confirm or clarify.


----------



## jwbrent

I know there’s a battery pack that Rob recommends, but has anyone tried others such as Anker, and if so, how did you like the sound?


----------



## linearly (Jul 12, 2019)

Hello, long time forum lurker here, decided to break the ice and make my first post.

In the past I've owned Mojo, Hugo 2 and DAVE, now recently got Qutest. I'm very happy with it, but was wondering on what would be the best input, USB or Optical. I see most prefer optical and maybe someone has experience with more expensive USB cables. I have a Audioquest Diamond USB from DAVE days and comparing it with the optical cable from Hugo 2 there is no contest really. Sure optical sounds darker, but the magic from the music is gone. With the AQ cable you can 'feel' the music, its like you are there, everything is more tangible, with no hint of harshness or digital glare. So the question is will a better optical cable surpass the AQ USB? Was thinking about Audioquest Diamond Optical, has anyone tried it against other glass optical? With Hugo 2 I've tried a glass cable and it was so much worse then stock optical, with a lot of harshness added, no clue how that's even possible.

Also I see many prefer to power the Qutest with a battery. I guess it depends, but for me doing that was so much worse then stock psu. It sounded so much brighter, really couldn't even listen more then 10 minutes. Someone here in this thread said that batteries would be worse since they are made to charge our devices not power high end audio gear and will introduce more noise, I guess he was on to something. For me Qutest sounds best now directly powered from PC's USB 3.0 port.


----------



## GreenBow

Please does anyone know how many amps the Qutest requires at 5V. The supplied charger is the same as the Hugo 2 charger and provides 2.1A. (Cover charging and playing.) Would the charger that I used with Mojo at 1A be enough. Just in case one day, if the Qutest charger failed.


----------



## GreenBow

MagnusH said:


> Toslink cables causes different amount of jitter, and no DAC removes all jitter, only lessens the effect. So even with a Chord DAC you get some benefit from a better toslink cable.



On USB Chord DACs send for data asynchronously, with an accurate clock. Then when all the samples arrive at the DAC they are clocked, which negates an jitter caused by cables. How jitter-free samples are, played with Chord DACs is therefore down to how accurate their clock is. There is no induced jitter in playback, due to data transference. The system is called iso-asynchronous. (Coaxial and optical are simply clocked.)


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 12, 2019)

GreenBow said:


> Please does anyone know how many amps the Qutest requires at 5V. The supplied charger is the same as the Hugo 2 charger and provides 2.1A. (Cover charging and playing.) Would the charger that I used with Mojo at 1A be enough. Just in case one day, if the Qutest charger failed.



I just measured current use of the Qutest.

In idle state it uses just over half an amp. (Something like 0.52A.) When playing music and a 192KHz file it pushed towards 0.6A. Similarly with 44.1KHz files. I found it also used more current when the music got louder. However the current increase was only small. In the few tests I ran, I never saw 0.6A fully; it was only as much as 0.59 etc amps. I drove it with a bit of 44.1KHz Def Leppard to get some peak power usage.

5V x 0.6A = 3W

(Side Note. Needing more current when music gets louder is the purpose of the supercaps in the TT2. When peaks currents are needed there is fast access power on tap. Hence why TT series would be more dynamic. Everyone probably already knows this, but I am just thinking out loud.)

I recall now that Rob Watts at some point mentioned that it's OK to leave the Qutest on. That being based on the minimal amount of power it uses. I am sure he mentioned figures of only 3W, but best check that. (I am going by vague memory here.) Personally I prefer to turn off Qutest over night. (Fire precaution. Although I doubt the Qutest could cause a fire.)

I do wish there was an off button though. I wonder about how it affects components when pulling power. Going by PCs can get damaged doing that. Although I am fully sure that it's safe to power Qutest like this. When I think how the Hugo 2 powers off, it's pretty much the same. Hold power button, and after a couple of seconds Hugo 2 shuts straight off.


----------



## Deftone

linearly said:


> Hello, long time forum lurker here, decided to break the ice and make my first post.
> 
> In the past I've owned Mojo, Hugo 2 and DAVE, now recently got Qutest. I'm very happy with it, but was wondering on what would be the best input, USB or Optical. I see most prefer optical and maybe someone has experience with more expensive USB cables. I have a Audioquest Diamond USB from DAVE days and comparing it with the optical cable from Hugo 2 there is no contest really. Sure optical sounds darker, but the magic from the music is gone. With the AQ cable you can 'feel' the music, its like you are there, everything is more tangible, with no hint of harshness or digital glare. So the question is will a better optical cable surpass the AQ USB? Was thinking about Audioquest Diamond Optical, has anyone tried it against other glass optical? With Hugo 2 I've tried a glass cable and it was so much worse then stock optical, with a lot of harshness added, no clue how that's even possible.
> 
> Also I see many prefer to power the Qutest with a battery. I guess it depends, but for me doing that was so much worse then stock psu. It sounded so much brighter, really couldn't even listen more then 10 minutes. Someone here in this thread said that batteries would be worse since they are made to charge our devices not power high end audio gear and will introduce more noise, I guess he was on to something. For me Qutest sounds best now directly powered from PC's USB 3.0 port.



I am going to be doing some more testing with optical vs usb, keeping it simple, both cables cost under £7. 

Whether it is fake detail and transparency from noise or not some people seem to quite like it with usb.


----------



## linearly

GreenBow said:


> I just measured current use of the Qutest.
> 
> In idle state it uses just over half an amp. (Something like 0.52A.) When playing music and a 192KHz file it pushed towards 0.6A. Similarly with 44.1KHz files. I found it also used more current when the music got louder. However the current increase was only small. In the few tests I ran, I never saw 0.6A fully; it was only as much as 0.59 etc amps. I drove it with a bit of 44.1KHz Def Leppard to get some peak power usage.
> 
> ...




I really like the convenience of powering Qutest from PC's USB 3.0 port, less clutter and don't have to worry about powering it on/off. For me it doesn't really sound different vs. stock psu, also have a Jitterbug added to the power cable.

Thank you for the measurments, was a bit worried it will affect the sound somehow since the psu is 5v 2amps and pc usb is rated 5v 0.9amps.


----------



## linearly

Deftone said:


> I am going to be doing some more testing with optical vs usb, keeping it simple, both cables cost under £7.
> 
> Whether it is fake detail and transparency from noise or not some people seem to quite like it with usb.



I've found another optical cable in my unused cables bin and did further testing. Its a Wireworld Nova Toslink and compared with stock optical from Hugo2 there are big differences. Not sure why, since both are acrylic, maybe the polished ends or number of strands who knows, but with the WW the veil lifted and the sound is so much better. 

Now comparing WW optical with AQ Diamond USB, the differences are still there, but its hard to decide what cable I like more. Optical is more laid back, USB is more energetic, the details are about the same, the voices are more lifelike on the optical. I think I prefer the Nova optical vs usb for now. Can't imagine what a good glass toslink will do, if it sounds tiny bit better vs usb with a plastic one. 

Will get the AQ Diamond Optical in the future, I'm sure it will surpass usb. As always my findings don't have to be the same for everyone, it depends on the system, how noisy the PC is, the house's power, the optical source etc. So what works for me doesn't have to work for everybody.


----------



## Zzt231gr

linearly said:


> I've found another optical cable in my unused cables bin and did further testing. Its a Wireworld Nova Toslink and compared with stock optical from Hugo2 there are big differences. Not sure why, since both are acrylic, maybe the polished ends or number of strands who knows, but with the WW the veil lifted and the sound is so much better.
> 
> Now comparing WW optical with AQ Diamond USB, the differences are still there, but its hard to decide what cable I like more. Optical is more laid back, USB is more energetic, the details are about the same, the voices are more lifelike on the optical. I think I prefer the Nova optical vs usb for now. Can't imagine what a good glass toslink will do, if it sounds tiny bit better vs usb with a plastic one.
> 
> Will get the AQ Diamond Optical in the future, I'm sure it will surpass usb. As always my findings don't have to be the same for everyone, it depends on the system, how noisy the PC is, the house's power, the optical source etc. So what works for me doesn't have to work for everybody.


I recently purchased the Lifatec optical and it is excellent!


----------



## Doom0

kumar402 said:


> Currently I have Chord Qutest and Gumby with me. So I thought of spending this beautiful and sunny Saturday afternoon in Long _Island _within the comfort of my bedroom comparing the DACs ,I mean thats what an audiophile is supposed to do in a sunny afternoon. I am using HD800s and 600 to compare and will first use Valhalla 2 and then LP with sys as switch box. I am not sure how to volume match both as I am using 2v out and I guess that should help me to do have same volume. Based on initial impression, I feel Gumby pushes the stage little back and Qutest brings things more upfront and Valhalla2 as dry treble and Gumby is taking the leading edge off which may and may not be good thing based on headhone and amp one has. Will report back later however I am not a technical audiophile so my comparison will miss words like transient etc, it will be in words of layman audiophile.
> PS: I own both and so I feel I will not have any bias but I will leave that for self discovery.


I was browsing this thread but I did not see you reporting back as your promised. But looking at your current signature, it seems like you preferred Gumby over Qutest after all.


----------



## kumar402 (Jul 13, 2019)

Doom0 said:


> I was browsing this thread but I did not see you reporting back as your promised. But looking at your current signature, it seems like you preferred Gumby over Qutest after all.


Ya I ended up keeping Gumby but to be quite honest it’s just preference. Here is what I posted in Gumby thread
“I like the denser tonality in vocals in Gumby. In contrast Qutest has the extension in the vocals but the way Gumby rounds off the vocals gives it a nice denser tonality.
Also I am enjoying the holographic soundstage, it fills the big cups of empyrean with sound and it engulfs you. It’s a nice experience.The stage seems pushed back compared to Qutest which has more upfront staging. The layering and separation is fantastic in Gumby. Although Gumby gives that 3D soundstage , I feel Qutest has bit more depth due to more extension in treble?
I feel better micro dynamics in Gumby as I can hear instruments at different level within a passage of play. However if you are fan of details Qutest pulls ahead as every little detail of music pops up at you but is it at the cost of dynamics, I am not sure? However I wouldn’t say I missed any detail in Gumby it’s just that every background instrument seems louder and easier to pick on in Qutest. Also with my listening level I didn’t find any difference in black background of Gumby and Qutest. Both are dead silent”

Most of the amp that I have or is in preorder stage are balanced and that also tilted the favor towards Gumby. Form factor wise Gumby is quite big and heavy. Almost 11Lb


----------



## GreenBow

linearly said:


> I've found another optical cable in my unused cables bin and did further testing. Its a Wireworld Nova Toslink and compared with stock optical from Hugo2 there are big differences. Not sure why, since both are acrylic, maybe the polished ends or number of strands who knows, but with the WW the veil lifted and the sound is so much better.
> 
> Now comparing WW optical with AQ Diamond USB, the differences are still there, but its hard to decide what cable I like more. Optical is more laid back, USB is more energetic, the details are about the same, the voices are more lifelike on the optical. I think I prefer the Nova optical vs usb for now. Can't imagine what a good glass toslink will do, if it sounds tiny bit better vs usb with a plastic one.
> 
> Will get the AQ Diamond Optical in the future, I'm sure it will surpass usb. As always my findings don't have to be the same for everyone, it depends on the system, how noisy the PC is, the house's power, the optical source etc. So what works for me doesn't have to work for everybody.



When I put a Jitterbug on the USB with Mojo I found it changed the sound. It needs noise removal, just the same as how you have your power cable set up. Noise gets into the analogue parts of the DAC and causes brightness.

I have Jitterbugs by default now.


Having said that though, Rob Watts put noise filtering on the USB input of the Hugo 2. I still have a Jitterbug in place when I use Hugo 2 from PC though.


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 14, 2019)

By the way, if anyone is wondering, since I have Hugo 2 and Qutest. I did a short ten minutes with each comparison. I didn't hear a single note of difference between the two.

Neither did I head a difference when I put an iFi Nano USB power supply on the Qutest. (It's meant to have excellent measurements of RFI and noise. Military grade level measurements.) I might need to spend longer comparing. Or leaving the Qutest on one PS for a week and then another. I generally finding it easier to asses changes in sound signatures that way. That means my A-B listening of the tests I mentioned (Hugo 2/Qutest and Qutest power supplies) is not definitive.

I for sure did not notice any extra brightness when using either power supply. Not did I detect any brightness using Qutest on PS, compared to Hugo 2 on battery. Some folk do say on here that they do, and I am not saying they are wrong. Just that I saw no difference, in the short tests that I did.


However it's not likely that I will be making any more comparative listening tests. I use a TT2 when I am listening to music. Therefore listening to music on the Qutest/Hugo 2, with set pieces of music isn't really going to happen.


----------



## cotic54

Just reporting back on how everything went.

I checked the consumer unit and found the ofending fridge breaker next to the hifi breakers so I moved the feed to the opposite side, now the supply does hifi first then fridge , this made no difference, also other breakers that were on the offending list 
are well away from the hifibreakers . Then I put all hifi onto one single, feed so all on the same earth this also made no difference so then I installed a Toslink cable and most of the pauses in sound dissapeard completly leaving only the slightest occasional pop from the 
electric sun blide stopping. The sound is slightly different with the toslink but not in any detrimental way. I may well try a battery in the future just to find out if it improves the the sound, from other posters it seems it works for some people and not for others.
Bearing that in mind could anyone verifiy that this battery is compatible with the Quetest. https://www.amazon.fr/Anker-PowerCo...locphy=9055061&hvtargid=pla-122879971686&th=1

 Thanks for all your input and help sorting out my problem.

P.S I would just like to say how reasuring it is that Rob Watts is paticipating in the Chord threads and ready to answer peoples questions, it is a big plus point to any purchasers .


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 14, 2019)

cotic54 said:


> Bearing that in mind could anyone verifiy that this battery is compatible with the Quetest. https://www.amazon.fr/Anker-PowerCo...locphy=9055061&hvtargid=pla-122879971686&th=1



I can't see any reason why could not use that with the Qutest. It runs at 5V and can supply up to 3A on one power line. Qutest uses under 1A.

It looks like it would last for a long time too.


----------



## cotic54

Thanks, just wanted to be sure about it.


----------



## GreenBow

GreenBow said:


> By the way, if anyone is wondering, since I have Hugo 2 and Qutest. I did a short ten minutes with each comparison. I didn't hear a single note of difference between the two.
> 
> Neither did I head a difference when I put an iFi Nano USB power supply on the Qutest. (It's meant to have excellent measurements of RFI and noise. Military grade level measurements.) I might need to spend longer comparing. Or leaving the Qutest on one PS for a week and then another. I generally finding it easier to asses changes in sound signatures that way. That means my A-B listening of the tests I mentioned (Hugo 2/Qutest and Qutest power supplies) is not definitive.
> 
> ...



Actually just had a second thought about these current results. Qutest was pulling just under 0.6A.

However I had Qutest set to 2V output. 

At 3V Qutest would draw more power.
Secondly if you were running M-Scaler into Qutest at 768KHz, then that might also draw more power.


----------



## Triode User

GreenBow said:


> Actually just had a second thought about these current results. Qutest was pulling just under 0.6A.
> 
> However I had Qutest set to 2V output.
> 
> ...



Are these currents at the mains voltage or at the dc output from the power supply?


----------



## miketlse

GreenBow said:


> Actually just had a second thought about these current results. Qutest was pulling just under 0.6A.
> 
> However I had Qutest set to 2V output.
> 
> ...


Yes if qutest is outputting a higher voltage/power, then the input current/power to qutest could rise.
Not sure about the second case, because using mscaler means that you are replacing the Qutest internal upscaling, by the mscaler external upscaling. If this switches off the Qutest internal upscaling, then you could see the current to the Qutest decrease.


----------



## Qute Beats (Jul 15, 2019)

GreenBow said:


> I can't see any reason why could not use that with the Qutest. It runs at 5V and can supply up to 3A on one power line. Qutest uses under 1A.
> 
> It looks like it would last for a long time too.


I concur, while some battery packs may sound cleaner, but as long as 5 V supplied you should be Kool and the Gang.  I've ran mine off a battery charger I used for my 3000MAh 18650 ecig batteries and it was fine (has 5V USB out).  But went back to PSU as heard no benefits.

edit: just a note though, trying to have battery pack charging at the same same caused Qutest to play up, running off the batteries alone was grand.


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 15, 2019)

Triode User said:


> Are these currents at the mains voltage or at the dc output from the power supply?





miketlse said:


> Yes if qutest is outputting a higher voltage/power, then the input current/power to qutest could rise.
> Not sure about the second case, because using mscaler means that you are replacing the Qutest internal upscaling, by the mscaler external upscaling. If this switches off the Qutest internal upscaling, then you could see the current to the Qutest decrease.



Actually found it ran at the same current when running at 3V output. Just under 0.6A. (Sorry about camera quality. Still have not bought a good one yet.)


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 15, 2019)

Have a question though please. I normally unplug the Qutest overnight, but left it plugged in for maybe two days. It runs on my PC.

Today I started up my PC twice. The second time (after I had been out for a walk) the Qutest did not register the PC. I could not get sound, and after looking at settings and whatever I could think of. I looked in the port window and noticed that there was no sampling rate light. I restarted the Qutest and all was good.

However I think this is incorrect behaviour. I know Rob has said that you can leave the Qutest on all the time. I was not expecting to have to restart the Qutest. I was not expecting the sampling rate light to go out.

Normally when I start up the PC and maybe go to YouTube it will play anything I send to it. Today not the case. Does anyone know if this is a fault? Or is this OK.


It might be a one off. It could be something that I have done. The TT2 does still have an effect on my PC even when on stand-by. It's because the processor is still running, while it's on stand-by.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> I concur, while some battery packs may sound cleaner, but as long as 5 V supplied you should be Kool and the Gang.  I've ran mine off a battery charger I used for my 3000MAh 18650 ecig batteries and it was fine (has 5V USB out).  But went back to PSU as heard no benefits.
> 
> edit: just a note though, trying to have battery pack charging at the same same caused Qutest to play up, running off the batteries alone was grand.



I wonder how is the qutest powered with an ifi ipower compared to powered using a powerbank. The only issue ive heard was the ipower spreading noise to the rest of the components connected to the same power line? *Why comparing the ifi ipower and powerbank cause they run on similar price point.


----------



## GreenBow

I have iFi Nano USB. I used it with 5V power output only to the Qutest, meaning not cleaning the USB data cable. In the few minutes I tried that, I heard no difference.

Additionally though, I tried the iFi Nano USB on my Mojo once, for cleaning the USB lines. The result was horrific. The sound was so bright I didn't even run it more than a few seconds. No idea what that is all about, and maybe I did something wrong. However there's not really anything to get wrong. It might be something to do with the iFi re-clocking the signal, since Chord sent for data asynchronously.

I have also heard other people say the same, that iFi on the USB data line is very bright. 

On the power only line I hear no difference with the 5V power with Qutest. Neither when I tried it on my Mojo ages ago, for just power.


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 15, 2019)

GreenBow said:


> Have a question though please. I normally unplug the Qutest overnight, but left it plugged in for maybe two days. It runs on my PC.
> 
> Today I started up my PC twice. The second time (after I had been out for a walk) the Qutest did not register the PC. I could not get sound, and after looking at settings and whatever I could think of. I looked in the port window and noticed that there was no sampling rate light. I restarted the Qutest and all was good.
> 
> ...



I seem to have resolved this, but I am going to keep an eye on it.


----------



## Arniesb

GreenBow said:


> I have iFi Nano USB. I used it with 5V power output only to the Qutest, meaning not cleaning the USB data cable. In the few minutes I tried that, I heard no difference.
> 
> Additionally though, I tried the iFi Nano USB on my Mojo once, for cleaning the USB lines. The result was horrific. The sound was so bright I didn't even run it more than a few seconds. No idea what that is all about, and maybe I did something wrong. However there's not really anything to get wrong. It might be something to do with the iFi re-clocking the signal, since Chord sent for data asynchronously.
> 
> ...


Cable can be culprit. I think that even though Nano should provide clean power, but Cable can pick up noise too and with nano connected everything can be highlighted much more.
Had same problem with Audioquest cable and it was gone with different cables.


----------



## Ilias9001

GreenBow said:


> I seem to have resolved this, but I am going to keep an eye on it.


I have encountered this issue quite some times and contacted Chord. The response was that the fpga can sometimes be confused if you switch inputs or turn off and on your pc, so the easiest way is to just unplug the usb or whatever you are connecting it with and plug it back in.


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 16, 2019)

Ilias9001 said:


> I have encountered this issue quite some times and contacted Chord. The response was that the fpga can sometimes be confused if you switch inputs or turn off and on your pc, so the easiest way is to just unplug the usb or whatever you are connecting it with and plug it back in.



I will try explain what happened for me.

When it first happened I rebooted the Qutest and it was OK. The it happened very quickly again. I tried Qutest reboots and was thinking I had been sold a faulty Qutest. However I figured try another device on the USB input. I have a Sony DAP, and I an connect it to my Hugo 2, via an OTG cable. I connected it to the Qutest and the Qutest was immediately fine. Going back to PC there was still no sound. This sort of assured me that the Qutest was fine, probably.

On my PC in Sound control panel, I noticed something a bit odd. Since I have two DACS on my desktop, I can often see two Chord entries in the Sound panel. For the entry that runs my TT2, it's just Digital Output - *Chord Async *etc. The entry for the Qutest or Hugo 2 or Mojo, says Digital Output - *5 Chord Async.* (The second entry started of as 2 Chord Async, but then not known why jumped to 5.)

However those entries got swapped over somehow. That seemed to be the problem. Whether it was or not, I don't know. Clicking make one or the other default, for a while didn't fix the Qutest issue. After a couple of 'Default resets' and a couple of reboots, I had the Qutest back.

I think the PC gets confused by having two Chord products, when one get unplugged. Like the TT2 entry in Sound Control Panel, is always there, whether the TT2 is on or off. The TT2 is only ever in stand-by or on, if it is plugged in. It talks to the PC even when in stand-by.


I'd like to think that it's what you say, though, that Chord said. However unplugging the USB and plugging it back in, didn't work.


----------



## Qute Beats

GreenBow said:


> Have a question though please. I normally unplug the Qutest overnight, but left it plugged in for maybe two days. It runs on my PC.
> 
> Today I started up my PC twice. The second time (after I had been out for a walk) the Qutest did not register the PC. I could not get sound, and after looking at settings and whatever I could think of. I looked in the port window and noticed that there was no sampling rate light. I restarted the Qutest and all was good.
> 
> ...


Saw that you fixed it   For info I leave my Qutest on 24/7.  There have been a few occasions when on booting PC I cannot play music until Qutest is restarted (on optical so PC doesn't 'see' Qutest), then It's fine for months again (maybe happened 3-4 times over 18 months so quite impressive really).  The chip must lock-up or something, has never happened when listening so no big deal.


----------



## dinus777 (Jul 16, 2019)

Started testing my Qutest with Sbooster MK2 5-6V linear PSU.  On the manual it says that it needs at least 100 hours to "burn in". So I'll do my full comment later, but in short - it definitely better. And no RF noise , dead silent, even better than from anker Power bank 26800


----------



## Triode User

dinus777 said:


> Started testing my Qutest with Sbooster MK2 5-6V linear PSU.  On the manual it says that it needs at least 100 hours to "burn in". So I'll do my full comment later, but in short - it definitely better. And no RF noise , dead silent, even better than from anker Power bank 26800



That looks great.

Just one point though and to clarify, when we are taking about RF noise effects, this is not something that is audible on its own. It causes intermodulation distortion of the musical signal leading to a certain brightness of the music and even to a slight less accurate bass or even fatigue. You need to have music playing in order to observe the effect. If one hears noises from a power supply without music playing then that is just plain old EMI or other issues.


----------



## dinus777

Triode User said:


> That looks great.
> 
> Just one point though and to clarify, when we are taking about RF noise effects, this is not something that is audible on its own. It causes intermodulation distortion of the musical signal leading to a certain brightness of the music and even to a slight less accurate bass or even fatigue. You need to have music playing in order to observe the effect. If one hears noises from a power supply without music playing then that is just plain old EMI or other issues.



You're right, i was referring to noise without music. With Chord Qutest stock PSU , if i set amp volume at 10-11-12 o'clock i can hear it clearly and it is annoying. With Anker PowerCore 26800 and with Sbooster it is both dead silent.


----------



## GreenBow

dinus777 said:


> You're right, i was referring to noise without music. With Chord Qutest stock PSU , if i set amp volume at 10-11-12 o'clock i can hear it clearly and it is annoying. With Anker PowerCore 26800 and with Sbooster it is both dead silent.



That's interesting. 

I just tried that and I only have the stock PSU running. Over my amp and speakers it's silent all the way up to full volume.


----------



## Qute Beats

GreenBow said:


> That's interesting.
> 
> I just tried that and I only have the stock PSU running. Over my amp and speakers it's silent all the way up to full volume.


On headphones with both on stock PSUs I have silence to max volume of head amp.  On speakers a bit of hiss from the pre-amp is all.


----------



## twinkletoes

This is my first post here but I'm after a bit of advice. Every now and then when passing a signal through the unit ie watching tv/listening to music the qutest seems to become distorted, like a crackle. Best way i can describe it, is  like a badly setup microphone clipping or rubbing against clothing. Also when flicking through the input selector the unit pops while flicking between the inputs, where its normally silent. I guess some how it got overloaded, static? Now when i turn off the tv/or computer and restart the music/program the crackle disappears but the pop between inputs remains. The only way i can get rid of the pop is to restart the qutest. No great hassle. It can sit there for weeks and not be a problem only happens now and again but I’ve only owned it 2-3 months Is it normal that it needs a little restart every now and then?


----------



## Qute Beats (Jul 16, 2019)

twinkletoes said:


> This is my first post here but I'm after a bit of advice. Every now and then when passing a signal through the unit ie watching tv/listening to music the qutest seems to become distorted, like a crackle. Best way i can describe it, is  like a badly setup microphone clipping or rubbing against clothing. Also when flicking through the input selector the unit pops while flicking between the inputs, where its normally silent. I guess some how it got overloaded, static? Now when i turn off the tv/or computer and restart the music/program the crackle disappears but the pop between inputs remains. The only way i can get rid of the pop is to restart the qutest. No great hassle. It can sit there for weeks and not be a problem only happens now and again but I’ve only owned it 2-3 months Is it normal that it needs a little restart every now and then?


Welcome!  Strange behaviour, never had those issues and doesn't sound right, if you bought from a store maybe go back and see what they think.
edit: I made comment above re restarting mine on odd occasions, but in those instances it was silent, just seemed to have locked up and needed reboot.


----------



## twinkletoes

Qute Beats said:


> Welcome!  Strange behaviour, never had those issues and doesn't sound right, if you bought from a store maybe go back and see what they think.
> edit: I made comment above re restarting mine on odd occasions, but in those instances it was silent, just seemed to have locked up and needed reboot.



Thank you for the warm welcome, im a little different to you guys in that I mostly listen to mine through a standalone hifi into speakers, a nice sugden a21 sig class A (21 watt monster LOL)  and klipsch heresy 3s and really enjoy the sound of it. I'm currently in talks with Ed at chord but i thought i'd come here and pick a few brains to see if there where anybody else encountering the same thing or something similar I have the worst luck with electronic equipment. Im guessing it maybe a static issue as i have to ground myself before touching my equipment and on occasion even after grounding my self i can stick shock the amp. 

It does seem after reading through that most have to restart the qutest at some point for what ever reason. Hopefully its just the FPGA getting little confused and causing some feedback on occasion. If anyone else has any thought i would love to hear them.


----------



## Zzt231gr

dinus777 said:


> You're right, i was referring to noise without music. With Chord Qutest stock PSU , if i set amp volume at 10-11-12 o'clock i can hear it clearly and it is annoying. With Anker PowerCore 26800 and with Sbooster it is both dead silent.


This sounds like ground loop.Mine is silent like others'.

Please post your outcome for the Sbooster!


----------



## linearly

GreenBow said:


> I have iFi Nano USB. I used it with 5V power output only to the Qutest, meaning not cleaning the USB data cable. In the few minutes I tried that, I heard no difference.
> 
> Additionally though, I tried the iFi Nano USB on my Mojo once, for cleaning the USB lines. The result was horrific. The sound was so bright I didn't even run it more than a few seconds. No idea what that is all about, and maybe I did something wrong. However there's not really anything to get wrong. It might be something to do with the iFi re-clocking the signal, since Chord sent for data asynchronously.
> 
> ...



Same results here, in the past I've tried Ifi Micro iUSB 3.0 with Hugo 2 and DAVE, it made both of them sound exactly like you are describing. And sure usb cables make a difference, but even with better cables it was still horrible. With other DAC's the micro iUSB 3.0 is amazing, but not with Chord, at least not in my system.

Also not all battery power banks sound the same powering Qutest, tried with a Asus one, while amazing for charging devices, for Qutest it sounded worse then stock psu, sound was so much brighter. So I've got another brand, Promate, and sound was closer to stock psu, but still too bright for my taste.

Right now I'm using USB port from PC to power the Qutest, and optical for audio, wondering if going to a galvanic solution, like Intona, or maybe a PCI express card like Matrix Element H will improve sound.

After trying several optical sources to Qutest found that all of them sound different, no clue how thats even possible, maybe the optical connector, or extra jitter added. Will test further once Diamond Optical arrives, but with the cables I have atm I prefer the smsl x-usb xmos u208 to xmos u8 (much brighter) and pc optical port last.


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 20, 2019)

@linearly I have heard some criticism of PCI-E cards on PC that convert to optical. However I can't see how there could be a problem. Optical is clean, and needs no more 'sorting out'. At least or rather I should say, with chord DACs, since Chord clock the incoming samples accurately.

Someone even recently posted on the M-Scaler thread about this very process. That's going from perceived noisy coaxial from M-Scaler, to optical to cure noise and brightness. Then clean coaxial to go on to the DAC.(Claimed brightness coming from the M-Scaler.)

Optical out from PC should be top-notch. For my most recent PC build, I absolutely made sure I bought a motherboard with optical. Although I am generally using USB from PC. (I still have an optical cable from my PC to TT2 connected all the time.)

Something else occurred to me just recently. We use Jitterbugs on our PC output port. However it would make more sense to put the Jitterbug at the DAC end. E.g. use a USB cable into jitterbug, and then a very short UBS extension, from Jitterbug to DAC. That way, most of the noise picked up by the USB cable will be removed. …. The alternative I think is iFi products. Or at least they make power cable cleaners.

You do raise an point though. Noise is supposed to be filtered on the Hugo 2 USB input, according to Rob Watts. However you're saying that noise is present in the Hugo 2 after using iFi to clean the USB lines. I only noticed it on the Mojo, and never even bothered to try it on the Hugo 2.


----------



## OctavianH

I used in the past ISO Regen, then tried for a very short period of time iFi nano iUSB3.0 and now and from now on JCAT. If you have a desktop or a PCIex port, this is the best solution. The first 2 were sold.


----------



## mmhifi

Question: 2 months ago I purchased new Qutest and now got brand new M-Scaler as well. 
I did dual BNC connection and with OP SR white(max) I had GREEN INPUT light on my BNC1 or  BNC2.
The colour in the window seems to be right(cyan). Is it ok colour for Qutest bnc INPUTS with scaler?
I had no blue colour at all  but my Qutest manual didn't mention it (by online manual of Chord website - the colour must be blue) . 
If I  change OP SR(not max sampling) my bnc inputs change to white.


----------



## Windseeker

mmhifi said:


> Question: 2 months ago I purchased new Qutest and now got brand new M-Scaler as well.
> I did dual BNC connection and with OP SR white(max) I had GREEN INPUT light on my BNC1 or  BNC2.
> The colour in the window seems to be right(cyan). Is it ok colour for Qutest bnc INPUTS with scaler?
> I had no blue colour at all  but my Qutest manual didn't mention it (by online manual of Chord website - the colour must be blue) .
> If I  change OP SR(not max sampling) my bnc inputs change to white.



I'm not sure I understood your question, but when connected properly with M-Scaler, Qutest's "Input" LED color should be showing blue.


----------



## mmhifi

Windseeker said:


> I'm not sure I understood your question, but when connected properly with M-Scaler, Qutest's "Input" LED color should be showing blue.



Yes - this was the question.  In my (very new)  Qutest input LED was green for max sampling rate and white for other. No blue at all.
And blue colour wasn't documented in my user manual.


----------



## Windseeker

mmhifi said:


> Yes - this was the question.  In my (very new)  Qutest input LED was green for max sampling rate and white for other. No blue at all.
> And blue colour wasn't documented in my user manual.



Perhaps you may want to recheck that you've properly connected BNC output 1 & 2 from the M-Scaler (as there are several BNC connectors on M-Scaler).

If the connection is correct and you're looking at the right LED (on the input selector, NOT the colors shown in the viewing glass), you may want to contact your local dealer.


----------



## Zzt231gr

For guys using CDs:

Are you using the green filter on CDs that are mainly late Japanese remasters or CDs that are 2000s and after?I find many of these sounding bright-among other sound quality problems...


----------



## gadgetman67

I recently purchased the hifiberry digi+ hooked up to the chord qutest with a optical cable.
Now it plays 24bit 192khz, but what i do not understand i tried a dsd file which played back and the light on the qutest turned white.
I thought the optical standard was only 24/196khz.


----------



## Rob Watts

Qutest, in common with all my DACs will decode DoP via SPDIF - so you can get DSD64 via optical if your source transmits it. DSD64 is the maximum via optical though.


----------



## Windseeker

gadgetman67 said:


> Now it plays 24bit 192khz, but what i do not understand i tried a dsd file which played back and the light on the qutest turned white.
> I thought the optical standard was only 24/196khz.



If you're referring to the color shown in the viewing glass, white simply means it detected DSD file as an input (regardless of the sample rate).


----------



## gadgetman67

Thanks Rob did not know that.


----------



## dac64

mmhifi said:


> Question: 2 months ago I purchased new Qutest and now got brand new M-Scaler as well.
> I did dual BNC connection and with OP SR white(max) I had GREEN INPUT light on my BNC1 or  BNC2.
> The colour in the window seems to be right(cyan). Is it ok colour for Qutest bnc INPUTS with scaler?
> I had no blue colour at all  but my Qutest manual didn't mention it (by online manual of Chord website - the colour must be blue) .
> If I  change OP SR(not max sampling) my bnc inputs change to white.



For my case, the colour of the right-hand is mixture of blue + green for dual BNCs.

If I removes any of the BNC, i.e. single BNC, the colour of the right-hand is light (tea + yellow) 

correct or not, I don't know!


----------



## linearly

So after further listening tests with same usb cable and Nova optical there are differences between optical sources, the xmos U8 with golden TCXO clocks, and the smsl x-usb u208. The differences are there, and frankly I don't know which one I like more. 

The question is what changes the sound between them, since cables are the same, what can it be? I see they have different clocks, do they influence the optical toslink in any way? Or are the clocks there for the coaxial out only? Maybe its just the different xmos chips that makes them not soundalike or optical connectors on each. If the clocks make the difference then its easy, we look for the best clocks to chose the best optical source, wonder if the PC motherboard has any clocks at all or if it needs any. If PC optical doesn't have any clocks maybe thats the best since anything in the path of audio adds its own noise. 

I know I'm nitpicking here, the differences are small and maybe unimportant for most, but I like to do tests and choose the sound I like best.


----------



## Baten

PC/mobo definitely has clocks lol


----------



## linearly (Jul 23, 2019)

So since I have the Qutest I had a problem with powering it. The stock psu is a EMI/RFI generating monster, like all swithing power supplies. Noise was coming through my PC, monitors, amp and even headphone wires. No idea if this extra noise has any effect on sound or not, but for me it was annoying. Powering directly from PC's usb port everything was silent. Didn't have this issue with DAVE, everything was silent. I see some had some complaints on the TT2 forum aswell with feeling tingling by touching the case.

I got an Ifi iPower 5v to see if its better then the stock psu, but it had the same noise. I even considered buying a hifi pci e card to power Qutest, since this issue bothered me so much.

Even the power bank battery had EMI/RFI injected into Qutest. Until, by random testing, I introduced the battery with charing usb to PC's port, and behold, all the noise was gone. I guess it all went to the ground. That got me thinking that if I can somehow ground Qutest all the noise will go away.

And I've found the solution, it's called iFi Audio- Groundhog. Connected to the Ifi iPower 5v all the EMI/RFI is gone. Everything is silent as it was with DAVE. Don't know if this will work with stock PSU, needs an adapter, or if this will also work with TT2.

Such a cheap solution to a problem that I don't know if it affects sound quality or not, but for me it was bothersome. Will attach a picture to see how its connected, Ifi iPower 5v comes with an adapter DC jack to micro, the groundhog is between DC in and the adapter.


----------



## linearly

The Audioquest Diamond Optical Toslink arrived. I got gobsmacked so hard... I can't even... Will post a comparison with Diamond USB and other optical cables later. Need to recover from this awe.


----------



## Baten

linearly said:


> The Audioquest Diamond Optical Toslink arrived. I got gobsmacked so hard... I can't even... Will post a comparison with Diamond USB and other optical cables later. Need to recover from this awe.


Insert L.A. Noire "Doubt" meme here


----------



## odessamarin

linearly said:


> The Audioquest Diamond Optical Toslink arrived. I got gobsmacked so hard... I can't even... Will post a comparison with Diamond USB and other optical cables later. Need to recover from this awe.



yea, after you move out from USB with good SPDIF realization (source and cable), you will never look back. USB in the present realization for HiFi..  is a real compromise (to not say worse)


----------



## gadgetman67

Quick search am i correct £500 for a audio quest optical cable, wow £10 cable will do its digital i'm sure even Robb Watts would agree.


----------



## Qute Beats (Jul 23, 2019)

linearly said:


> So since I have the Qutest I had a problem with powering it. The stock psu is a EMI/RFI generating monster, like all swithing power supplies. Noise was coming through my PC, monitors, amp and even headphone wires. No idea if this extra noise has any effect on sound or not, but for me it was annoying. Powering directly from PC's usb port everything was silent. Didn't have this issue with DAVE, everything was silent. I see some had some complaints on the TT2 forum aswell with feeling tingling by touching the case.
> 
> I got an Ifi iPower 5v to see if its better then the stock psu, but it had the same noise. I even considered buying a hifi pci e card to power Qutest, since this issue bothered me so much.
> 
> ...


curious, does the grounding cable plug direct to wall socket?  I use iFi AC purifier, which has a ground socket (takes banana plug) , I have a ground from RCA shield between Qutest and amp to the iFi.  sounds fine, though hard to tell the difference when ground lead removed.


----------



## Qute Beats

gadgetman67 said:


> Quick search am i correct £500 for a audio quest optical cable, wow £10 cable will do its digital i'm sure even Robb Watts would agree.


must be real diamond fibre in there in there for that price..


----------



## Zzt231gr

Qute Beats said:


> must be real diamond fibre in there in there for that price..


IMO Audioquest is waaay over priced!


----------



## gadgetman67

yea you could knock a zero of the price and i would still not pay that for an optical cable. Maybe best we stop talking about this now otherwise will get into a cable war


----------



## Qute Beats

Zzt231gr said:


> IMO Audioquest is waaay over priced!


though was a shame they moved out o the headphone market, the Nighthawk's great sounding and against the competition not overpriced.  Maybe they weren't making big enough profits on them..


----------



## ra990

linearly said:


> So since I have the Qutest I had a problem with powering it. The stock psu is a EMI/RFI generating monster, like all swithing power supplies.


I've been using an Anker power bank rated at some 26800mah. It sounds great, no noise or interference at all. I actually tried a cheaper batter back and noticed the highs started to bother me. Switched back to the Anker and it has been sounding perfect. It also lasts a really long time. I just unplug it from the battery side when I'm done using it. Will last me several days before I need to recharge it.


----------



## linearly

Qute Beats said:


> curious, does the grounding cable plug direct to wall socket? I use iFi AC purifier, which has a ground socket (takes banana plug) , I have a ground from RCA shield between Qutest and amp to the iFi. sounds fine, though hard to tell the difference when ground lead removed.



Yes it plugs into the wall socket, I guess iFi AC purifier does the same thing and even more. No clue if it will sound different but I'm happy the emi/rfi noise is gone now.


----------



## linearly

Ok so before I share my impressions I don't want to offend anyone, everybody's system is different, others prefer a sound signature or another, but from personal experience cables do matter, analog, digital and it seems optical too. Before knocking a cable just by its price alone a person ought to try it first and see if its worth for them or not. After today I'm sorry I didn't try this cable sooner and lost two years of pure music joy with an inferior sounding solution. This is my personal opinion and take it as is.

After trying different cheaper usb cables, I've found Audioquest Diamond USB sounded the best for the sound signature I like, analog sounding, no veil to the music, details and a lot less harsh then other usb's. I used it a while with Jitterbug's, sure they help, but the sound was still harsh with some tracks. 

Going to optical with Hugo 2 stock toslink for Qutest, harshness was almost gone, but a veil was added to the music and it lost its character. Sounded less alive. No body at all. The magic was gone. So I had a Wireworld NOVA optical laying around, lets see if it sounds different. And it did. The veil was lifted, details were back, but it started to sound harsh again, not like the usb, but still annoying with some tracks. Also in the past I had a glass optical from QED and that was brighter then USB, thats why I was scared to try the Diamond Optical until now. And what a mistake that was. 

Come today I did not expect much, less harsh sound then usb, like with other optical cables, and maybe the veil to be lifted, with cheap plastic ones. And I have to say first song I played shocked me so much that I could not believe it. Everything that bothered me about music was gone, mainly harshness on some tracks, but not masking it with a veil, no, every detail was there, even more, I hear things I never did with USB, I also raised the volume even higher since harshness was completly gone. I was in awe, I had to force myself to go away and take a break, music was so addictive, never had this feeling before. 

USB Diamond is a great cable, I'm sure a lot use it, I did for years now. My source is my PC so I guess it adds a lot of unwanted noise. I'm not saying usb is bad, its different for everybody, but for me there is no contest between USB Diamond and Optical Diamond. You can't even say they are in the same league. I did not try other glass toslink besides the QED one, not sure if other sound close to the Diamond, I understand it uses fused silica, a glass that is 100% pure. But frankly I don't care, it sounds so good, I don't even want to try different usb>toslink adapters anymore, it just sounds amazing straight from PC's optical port.

I can understand how some doubt the value with such an expensive cable, but for me USB Diamond is roughly the same price as Optical, and the differences are so big, that I'm happy to pay this amount to be able to enjoy my music. And if I think about the amount I've spent on usb filters/ other cables, and never was happy with the sound, I'd rather be where I am now. As I said, other may find different results depending on personal preference, system, etc. The only thing I can say is try it, I regret not trying it sooner.


----------



## kerisabe

@linearly 

Glad to hear youve found the optical that suits your listening style. I was in the same boat tossing out the usb for optical, but it was a lifatec glass toslink. I wonder how the lifatec compared to the diamond toslink in terms of music character. Please do a comparison if you have the time/cable. Thanks


----------



## linearly

kerisabe said:


> @linearly
> 
> Glad to hear youve found the optical that suits your listening style. I was in the same boat tossing out the usb for optical, but it was a lifatec glass toslink. I wonder how the lifatec compared to the diamond toslink in terms of music character. Please do a comparison if you have the time/cable. Thanks



I'm sorry, unfortunately it's very difficult to buy Lifatec in Europe, that's the reason I went with Audioquest. The only glass cable I had was a glass QED and that one was very bright, almost usb like, so if your current cable is softer sounding then usb with no veil added then it should be close to Diamond Optical, but again, its different for everyone, all you can do is test for yourself and see if its worth it.


----------



## Zzt231gr

linearly said:


> I'm sorry, unfortunately it's very difficult to buy Lifatec in Europe, that's the reason I went with Audioquest..


It was around €120 for me and it was well worth!


----------



## Qute Beats

linearly said:


> I'm sorry, unfortunately it's very difficult to buy Lifatec in Europe, that's the reason I went with Audioquest. The only glass cable I had was a glass QED and that one was very bright, almost usb like, so if your current cable is softer sounding then usb with no veil added then it should be close to Diamond Optical, but again, its different for everyone, all you can do is test for yourself and see if its worth it.


Useful info on the QED.  I'm now thinking about moving to a glass cable as well, current cheap plastic one gives no issues, but if there's gains to be made then of course would like to try.  Yes seems the Lifatec only available in US, so I'm not sure what else to go for as the price of the Lifetac would be about the most I'd be happy spending.


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Useful info on the QED.  I'm now thinking about moving to a glass cable as well, current cheap plastic one gives no issues, but if there's gains to be made then of course would like to try.  Yes seems the Lifatec only available in US, so I'm not sure what else to go for as the price of the Lifetac would be about the most I'd be happy spending.



Ask a friend who is doing a trip to the states to help bring the lifatec back for you.


----------



## Deftone

QED reference optical quartz isnt bright sounding imo.


----------



## linearly

Deftone said:


> QED reference optical quartz isnt bright sounding imo.



As I said, it was for me, but as audio is, with everyone's system, source, gear etc the results may be different or the same. The QED cable is much much better then plastic ones, but I found it a bit too bright for my liking. So the best thing to do is to try it in your system.


----------



## Deftone

linearly said:


> As I said, it was for me, but as audio is, with everyone's system, source, gear etc the results may be different or the same. The QED cable is much much better then plastic ones, but I found it a bit too bright for my liking. So the best thing to do is to try it in your system.



Yes of course and that's why I was giving my findings from my system as it's not going to apply to everyone. With QED cable and HD660S/800S I got more treble air but not brightness or harshness and with Lifatech I get improved sub bass extension. With that said these are not night and day but very subtle differences.


----------



## linearly

So I've decided to sell the Qutest since I mainly listen to music via headphones, and was spoiled in the past by DAVE. With the cost of a good external amp and great interconnects figured might as well go for the Hugo TT2. Qutest was amazing sounding but with headphones a lot was lost between DAC and amp. So the choise was obvious.

Now listening to other DAC's until I get funds for TT2 I noticed something odd. Music sounds like it's playing at 0.8 speed, Chord DAC's sounded just right, other DAC's sound slow in comparison. Wonder if anyone else noticed this, funny thing is that Chord doesn't sound faster, other DAC's sound slower.


----------



## x RELIC x

linearly said:


> So I've decided to sell the Qutest since I mainly listen to music via headphones, and was spoiled in the past by DAVE. With the cost of a good external amp and great interconnects figured might as well go for the Hugo TT2. Qutest was amazing sounding but with headphones a lot was lost between DAC and amp. So the choise was obvious.
> 
> Now listening to other DAC's until I get funds for TT2 I noticed something odd. Music sounds like it's playing at 0.8 speed, Chord DAC's sounded just right, other DAC's sound slow in comparison. Wonder if anyone else noticed this, funny thing is that Chord doesn't sound faster, other DAC's sound slower.



Yes, exactly, and I thought I was the only one! I noticed it first with the iDAC2 in comparison to the Mojo, but then I picked up the same 'slow' perception from other gear as well.


----------



## Zzt231gr

x RELIC x said:


> Yes, exactly, and I thought I was the only one! I noticed it first with the iDAC2 in comparison to the Mojo, but then I picked up the same 'slow' perception from other gear as well.


Doesn't slower mean better timing?I noticed my Qutest being slower than my CD player and it was pretty noticeable.


----------



## x RELIC x

Zzt231gr said:


> Doesn't slower mean better timing?I noticed my Qutest being slower than my CD player and it was pretty noticeable.



I would think slower meant worse transients. There's also the phenomenon where the perception of 'faster' can be a side effect of a brighter sound. At the end of the day we all perceive things differently so I reckon that how I might describe something would be different from others. Still, it's interesting to read that someone else has had the same reaction as myself between Rob's DAC design and other DACs.


----------



## Rob Watts

The perception of tempo is subjective, and can be modified by a number of factors - one of which @x RELIC x  correctly identifies - frequency response, as a bright sound sounds faster, and a warmer sound is slower.

But if you improve the perception of transients - by making transient timing more accurate - then tempo increases - as one can perceive the leading edge better. On the other hand, if you improve instrument separation and focus, and reduce the dominance effect (where one's attention constantly shifts too the loudest instrument) then it actually sounds slower. Curiously, the M scaler can have both benefits at the same time, although an M scaler on a Qutest will have a biggest effect with dominance, so on balance it sounds slower and more measured, with a more natural sense of flow.

Comparing my DACs to conventional ones will give both improvements - better perception of the starting and stopping of notes (faster), and much reduced dominance effect (slower) - which aspect wins out will depend upon the existing DAC, the rest of your system, and the bit between your ear lobes!


----------



## Deftone

Feeding the THX with Hugo2 and Cobalt they sound about the same speed but if I connect Mojo it sounded the slowest with the thickest bass.

I think the treble of Hugo and Cobalt are contributing to the perception of faster sound.


----------



## Masterwarzombie

Hi ,sorry for my  english 
I am a happy owner of a chord quest
it is associated via usb to my audio streamer sotm 200 ultra neo.
my amp is an arcam avr 850.
I do not know what voltage to choose on my chord quest in association with that of my arcam
I can choose on my entries rca of my arcam a voltage input of 1, 2 and 4 volts
on the chord, 1.2 and 3 volts output
I put 2 volts for the moment on both devices but I would like to try 3 volts on my amp.
is this risk? I'm afraid to make a mistake
thank you Laurent


----------



## Baten

Masterwarzombie said:


> Hi ,sorry for my  english
> I am a happy owner of a chord quest
> it is associated via usb to my audio streamer sotm 200 ultra neo.
> my amp is an arcam avr 850.
> ...


2V seems like the most compatible option.

3V will only make DAC output louder. Do you need it to be louder? If no, keep 2V


----------



## Masterwarzombie

Thanks for your precisions
I would like to see what gives 3 volts. if i want to try, i have to put what voltage in input? I leave 2 volts or I rock on 4 volts on my arcam?


----------



## twinkletoes

Masterwarzombie said:


> Thanks for your precisions
> I would like to see what gives 3 volts. if i want to try, i have to put what voltage in input? I leave 2 volts or I rock on 4 volts on my arcam?



I was in a similar situation to you with my sugden a21, even though its designed around a 2 volt input (well 1.7 something) this would give me full volume on a quarter rotation (9 o'clock) on the on the volume dial and personally not all that ideal. 3 volts would give me no control at all and overload the input and push the speakers into distortion causing damage if listen to  for long periods of time. From personal experience, especially if you have really sensitive speakers (which you haven't really mentioned i don't believe) leave the qutest at 1 volt and the same for your arcam leave it on it default values those adjustment are there purely for insensitive sources such as turntables the qutest is certainly not an insensitive source, at worst you'll just have to it up a touch more but id rather not  overload and distort my speakers it will be more controlled and you'll be able to use your full volume sweep which is what those AVR's are designed for.

 either way i be inclined to actually contact Arcam I'm sure they'll be happy to help and see what they say  and  follow there advice


----------



## miketlse

I think so. You will be able to tell if you overload the input because you will start to hear clipping or distortion. 2V was the widespread standard used when CD was first available, so virtually all amplifiers can cope with it.


----------



## twinkletoes

miketlse said:


> I think so. You will be able to tell if you overload the input because you will start to hear clipping or distortion. 2V was the widespread standard used when CD was first available, so virtually all amplifiers can cope with it.



the key word in your sentence being "virtually" and being the audio world im sure there all measured differently using different standards or a rounding up or down eg 2 volts for chord might be more like 2.5 volts and so on (not saying it is but you get the idea)


----------



## Masterwarzombie

M’y speakers are b&w 804d3


----------



## kerisabe

Best move would be to try the qutest different output levels playing in your system. Start from 1v and up, and try to hear if the sound starts giving distortion/clipping. In my setup (gryphon diablo 300, bw 803), i was told by my local dealer to use the qutest at 2v , but heard some clipping/distortion, so went ive set it up at 1v. So i let the amp to push the sound.


----------



## twinkletoes

Masterwarzombie said:


> M’y speakers are b&w 804d3



just use the 1v setting your speakers are pretty sensitive it will give you the most control


----------



## HumanMedia

Masterwarzombie said:


> Hi ,sorry for my  english
> I am a happy owner of a chord quest
> it is associated via usb to my audio streamer sotm 200 ultra neo.
> my amp is an arcam avr 850.
> ...



Here is a contrary opinion.

Set your input to 4 volts and set the Qutest output to 3 volts.

Assumptions
Since it’s an avr, there won’t be a ‘maximum volume at 3 o’clock on the volume dial’ issue.
This gets the maximum signal to noise out of the Qutest. Also anecdotally the higher the output volume on the Qutest the better it sounds at the same volume out of the speakers. This has been mentioned perhaps early in this thread? And my memory is dim but there could have been a good reason for this, something to do with the volume being done digitally in a lossy fashion (decimated). 

Can’t hurt to try!


----------



## kerisabe

Anyone here running audirvana+ on a macbook pro via toslink to the qutest? I just realized is it not bit perfect? I just realized playing dsd files, DSD64, then on the bottom right is says DAC: 24/88.2 ? So everything gets converted to PCM by the MBP’s internal DAC before getting to qutest. @Rob Watts


----------



## x RELIC x

kerisabe said:


> Anyone here running audirvana+ on a macbook pro via toslink to the qutest? I just realized is it not bit perfect? I just realized playing dsd files, DSD64, then on the bottom right is says DAC: 24/88.2 ? So everything gets converted to PCM by the MBP’s internal DAC before getting to qutest. @Rob Watts



No, I doesn’t get converted by the internal DAC it gets converted by the software. Two different things.

You need to set Audirvana+ to DoP for DSD. This isn’t converting to PCM but rather a protocol for sending DSD without drivers.


----------



## kerisabe

x RELIC x said:


> No, I doesn’t get converted by the internal DAC it gets converted by the software. Two different things.
> 
> You need to set Audirvana+ to DoP for DSD. This isn’t converting to PCM but rather a protocol for sending DSD without drivers.


Noted. Thanks for explaining. It says under the settings “DSD is not supported” though? The current setting is “dsd over pcm 1.1”


----------



## x RELIC x

kerisabe said:


> Noted. Thanks for explaining. It says under the settings “DSD is not supported” though? The current setting is “dsd over pcm 1.1”



Oh, that is what I have Audirvana+ set to as well. Do you have 'Direct Mode' enabled? With the DAVE (I don't have the Qutest) I can't play with 'Direct Mode' enabled. Please check to see if you have sample rate conversions set on. I'm using an old version of Audirvana+ (version 2.6.8) so I wonder if there would be any differences between versions.

Also, is your optical cable able to pass along 24/192? That may be also a reason.


----------



## kerisabe

x RELIC x said:


> Oh, that is what I have Audirvana+ set to as well. Do you have 'Direct Mode' enabled? With the DAVE (I don't have the Qutest) I can't play with 'Direct Mode' enabled. Please check to see if you have sample rate conversions set on. I'm using an old version of Audirvana+ (version 2.6.8) so I wonder if there would be any differences between versions.
> 
> Also, is your optical cable able to pass along 24/192? That may be also a reason.



Upsampling is deactivated. I think I know why. Im running the audirvana+ on my old mbp which is limited to 24/96, thats probably why dsd is not available. Where can I find the “direct mode” setting in audirvana?


----------



## x RELIC x

kerisabe said:


> Upsampling is deactivated. I think I know why. Im running the audirvana+ on my old mbp which is limited to 24/96, thats probably why dsd is not available. Where can I find the “direct mode” setting in audirvana?



It’s with the DoP, Integer, and Exclusive mode settings... second tab in the preferences (can’t remember the tab name and I’m not in front of it now). Like I said previously, I’m running an older version so it may not be the same.


----------



## dinus777

Hi,

So, as promised  - sharing my comments about Sbooster Linear PSU with Chord Qutest. After "burn in", somehow i did not hear any benefits, and actually kind of liked the sound of stock psu or power bank more.
Stock PSU problem - ground noise to speakers, battery - i'm too tired to charge it once every 2'nd day.

After reading here that Qutest was grounded and solved all the ground loop noise issue, i bought ifi Groundhog  (https://ifi-audio.com/products/groundhog/ )  , AudioQuest BNC to RCA adapter and grounded my Qutest. Since i've no use for BNC at the moment, i connected ground through BNC.
And my problem solved. Now background is dead silent, even better that with battery, and to me Qutest now sound superb. And even using stock PSU. 

Here is the picture :


----------



## Masterwarzombie

Your sbooster causes a noise on the speakers ? Or noise was présent before?


----------



## dinus777

Masterwarzombie said:


> Your sbooster causes a noise on the speakers ? Or noise was présent before?



noise was present before. With Sbooster Qutest was dead silent.


----------



## Masterwarzombie

why did you buy ifi audio grund then?

your take with adapter bnc towards rca is connected on which product? on an audio streamer, an amp?

i got my sbooster i have to test when i get back


----------



## hornytoad

dinus777 said:


> Hi,
> 
> So, as promised  - sharing my comments about Sbooster Linear PSU with Chord Qutest. After "burn in", somehow i did not hear any benefits, and actually kind of liked the sound of stock psu or power bank more.
> Stock PSU problem - ground noise to speakers, battery - i'm too tired to charge it once every 2'nd day.
> ...


Audio Nervosa Psychosomatic Alert !


----------



## dinus777

Masterwarzombie said:


> why did you buy ifi audio grund then?
> 
> your take with adapter bnc towards rca is connected on which product? on an audio streamer, an amp?
> 
> i got my sbooster i have to test when i get back



yes, as for the ground, just prefered that way with ifi groundhog, but you can do it other way too


----------



## kerisabe

@dinus777 what dont you like about the sbooster driving your qutest? Actually i didnt have much complained running the qutest using its stock psu, i had it grounded from the beginning using an active ground unit. But recently i tried using the qutest with the ifi ipower 5v and the sound opened up and its more holographic, more lower end as well.


----------



## Deftone

kerisabe said:


> @dinus777 what dont you like about the sbooster driving your qutest? Actually i didnt have much complained running the qutest using its stock psu, i had it grounded from the beginning using an active ground unit. But recently i tried using the qutest with the ifi ipower 5v and the sound opened up and its more holographic, more lower end as well.



From another forum (if you beleive power supply makes a difference then it could be the best choice)



> When I was listening to the SCO’s Beethoven 192khz there really seemed to be more noise/haze at the top end with the Qutest. I tried the Incisive HF Roll off and it was still there. The RME’s balanced outputs just seemed cleaner. When I had used the RME’s RCA line outputs I found the reverse to be true. My thoughts went to the 2Qute. I had bought an MCRU linear power supply second hand when I owned one. It had really improved the sound, although I still hadn’t liked it and had sold it on. I wasn’t going to buy an MCRU when it was looking increasingly likely the Qutest would be going back. I had watched DARKO’s review on the Qutest and he recommended the iFi iPower supply. I found it on Amazon for £49, so I thought I should give it a try.
> 
> * Once it arrived I plugged it in and I must say it did the job. The Qutest now had the same quality depth of field and clean output that RME had via balanced outs. I was so happy. I had spent another £50 to get the £1,200 Qutest to the same quality as the £850 RME ADI-2!!
> 
> ...


----------



## kerisabe

@Deftone thanks for the assurance/forum post info. I might try to replace the ifi ipower on the qutest with a proper custom lpsu. Just curious how much of an improvement in sq over the ifi ipower 5v i have on now.


----------



## dinus777

kerisabe said:


> @dinus777 what dont you like about the sbooster driving your qutest? Actually i didnt have much complained running the qutest using its stock psu, i had it grounded from the beginning using an active ground unit. But recently i tried using the qutest with the ifi ipower 5v and the sound opened up and its more holographic, more lower end as well.


I did not like the Qutest sound with Sbooster lpsu, so i've sold Sbooster.

For me Anker 26800 power bank changed sound - opened soundstage, gave more depth and separation between instruments.  But now after grounding Qutest, it looks for me that it is more or less same as with battery, so i'm running Qutest with stock Chord PSU.


----------



## kerisabe

dinus777 said:


> I did not like the Qutest sound with Sbooster lpsu, so i've sold Sbooster.
> 
> For me Anker 26800 power bank changed sound - opened soundstage, gave more depth and separation between instruments.  But now after grounding Qutest, it looks for me that it is more or less same as with battery, so i'm running Qutest with stock Chord PSU.



Ic. But I still dont get, the specific reason you disliking the sound of sbooster powering the qutest? In theory it should be better than the stock psu and battery. To me, battery sounds sluggish/slow. No dynamics compared even w stock psu.


----------



## Masterwarzombie

I received my booster last Friday. I'm on vacation, on the way back, you'll have another opinion. my quest is associated with an ultra neo 200 sotm streamer connected by a power supply sps 500 from sotm.


----------



## HumanMedia (Aug 15, 2019)

I tried a first gen BOTW sbooster on my 2Qute and it made it sound too bassy. And the Teddy Pardo supply was way too lean.

However the new sbooster is a completely different supply and the 2Qute was a different DAC...

The goldilocks supply that was ‘juuuust right’ for my 2Qute and now Qutest is the UpTone JS-2. But at 1/3 to a half the price of the DAC, its a hard recommendation. And yes I tried the UpTone LPS-1.2 on the Qutest and the the JS-2 is far better (for my tastes, in my system, YMMV etc.)


----------



## dolphy007 (Aug 14, 2019)

I must be one of the few that is using the provided power supply. I am also using a Supra USB cable connected to the Auralic Airies + LPS. I've reached the point where I need to stop chasing rainbows and enjoy the music with what I have.

Enjoy the music, not the sounds that eminate from your speakers!


----------



## Masterwarzombie

Just arrived


----------



## HumanMedia

Great audio-porn shots! Nice system!
How does the new power supply sound?


----------



## hornytoad (Aug 15, 2019)

Masterwarzombie said:


> Just arrived


The ultimate in audio nervosa.Take those weights off the Qutest!


----------



## kerisabe

hornytoad said:


> The ultimate in audio nervosa.Take those weights off the Qutest!



What i’ve found interesting was, putting stillpoints under it made the qutest sounded dry.... losing its soul. But putting small wooden blocks and a bigger block on top of it really made it sing! I can hear more air/decay and it is way more musical. And the same thing happened with my source.


----------



## hornytoad

kerisabe said:


> What i’ve found interesting was, putting stillpoints under it made the qutest sounded dry.... losing its soul. But putting small wooden blocks and a bigger block on top of it really made it sing! I can hear more air/decay and it is way more musical. And the same thing happened with my source.[/QUOTE


----------



## Hooster

hornytoad said:


> The ultimate in audio nervosa.Take those weights off the Qutest!



Oh no, imagine the effect that would have on the sound quality!


----------



## HumanMedia

I’ve had to add weights to the top of my qutest. If I don’t, the weight of the cables, especially the two input BNCs, tips whole DAC back on its rear two feet where the slightest nudge will send it falling off the back of the shelf. A fall like that could easily snap that flimsy micro USB *tongue’ off. Wish it had a standard dc barrel power input...


----------



## Amberlamps

What kind of amps are you all using with Qutest ?

I'm thinking of getting a few things, one potential item is an amp for TT2, but I'm not 100% sure yet, but what are you all using with your Qutests ?

Cheers


----------



## snatex

Amberlamps said:


> What kind of amps are you all using with Qutest ?
> 
> I'm thinking of getting a few things, one potential item is an amp for TT2, but I'm not 100% sure yet, but what are you all using with your Qutests ?
> 
> Cheers



Violectric V280


----------



## Amberlamps

snatex said:


> Violectric V280



Is that just a headphone amp or can speakers be hooked up to it also ? 

I never really specified in my post, but I'm mainly looking at amp's to drive speakers.

Cheers


----------



## Chop-Top

Amberlamps said:


> I never really specified in my post, but I'm mainly looking at amp's to drive speakers.
> 
> Cheers



Naim NAP-250.2 and they sound great together!


----------



## Deftone (Aug 15, 2019)

Amberlamps said:


> Is that just a headphone amp or can speakers be hooked up to it also ?
> 
> I never really specified in my post, but I'm mainly looking at amp's to drive speakers.
> 
> Cheers



Benchmark AHB2, 0.00026% distortion at 500 watts.


----------



## Qute Beats

Hope no one minds be posting this, but I've put my Qutest up for sale after upgrading to the Hugo TT2.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-qutest-for-sale.913096/


----------



## kerisabe

Qute Beats said:


> Hope no one minds be posting this, but I've put my Qutest up for sale after upgrading to the Hugo TT2.
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-qutest-for-sale.913096/



Not at all. Congrats !


----------



## Qute Beats

Thanks, I loved the Qutest, but made the mistake(?) of demoing the TT2 and then kept thinking about it, so finally took the plunge.  Both are fabulous pieces of kit at their respective price points.


----------



## Ivodam

Amberlamps said:


> What kind of amps are you all using with Qutest ?
> 
> I'm thinking of getting a few things, one potential item is an amp for TT2, but I'm not 100% sure yet, but what are you all using with your Qutests ?
> 
> Cheers



I am using my Qutest with a Moon preamplifier and then a Moon power amplifier, driving large Tannoy Glenair 15 floorstanders. It sounds marvelous. I have tried using the Qutest with a passive amplifier only for volume control plus the power amplifier, but it sounds a bit dull to me, so I dropped this configuration. 
But the TT2 has got a nice amplification and volume control and balanced XLR outputs (which I strongly miss with the Qutest and hope to be added in a future modification), so there should be absolutely no problem hooking it up directly into the power amplifier.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Amberlamps said:


> What kind of amps are you all using with Qutest ?
> 
> I'm thinking of getting a few things, one potential item is an amp for TT2, but I'm not 100% sure yet, but what are you all using with your Qutests ?
> 
> Cheers


Exposure 3010S2 power with shunt type passive pre.

It is hugely transparent but that is not always good with old jazz recordings...


----------



## Paul Bjernklo

Deftone said:


> Benchmark AHB2, 0.00026% distortion at 500 watts.



The same for me with my Hugo 2, you want to preserve the low distortion and I have not seen a reasonably priced power amplifier with lower distortion. It is dead silent...


----------



## Jon L

HumanMedia said:


> A fall like that could easily snap that flimsy micro USB *tongue’ off. Wish it had a standard dc barrel power input...



My BIGGEST complaint with the Qutest, having nothing to do with sound quality, is that flimsy micro USB jack for power input.  It's a piece of junk, and it does not even require a fall to go bad and become intermittent.  If Chord is listening, please replace it with something more reliable


----------



## GradoSound

Jon L said:


> My BIGGEST complaint with the Qutest, having nothing to do with sound quality, is that flimsy micro USB jack for power input.  It's a piece of junk, and it does not even require a fall to go bad and become intermittent.  If Chord is listening, please replace it with something more reliable



I totally agree!

I have put some blue tack around the micro usb port just to help stop bending and/or detaching from the port. It's beyond me why it's done that way for a product costing close to $2K


----------



## Jon L

GradoSound said:


> I totally agree!
> 
> I have put some blue tack around the micro usb port just to help stop bending and/or detaching from the port. It's beyond me why it's done that way for a product costing close to $2K



That blue tack must look pretty ghetto, but I may try that...


----------



## miketlse (Aug 17, 2019)

[edited]
Taking an impartial engineers design viewpoint, there are two opposing approaches for dealing with users and sockets:

You allocate the full responsibility for protecting owners from themselves, to Chord, who then need to use full size USB sockets, or power cable sockets
Owners take 100% responsibility for their own gear, by ensuring that no excessive strain is placed on chord gear sockets
Several years of head-fi posts, have highlighted that not all owners can be trusted with Approach 2, so maybe Approach 1 is inevitable for future designs - simple to say, but there is an inevitable impact on circuit board layouts, component cost etc.


----------



## dolphy007

The micro usb socket is used by millions of people worldwide everyday, they're plugged and Unplugged multiple times per day. If it were such a poor connectivity option phone manufactures would have gone out of business. Are we complaining for the sake of complaining?

I've personally used at least 4 phones in the last 8 years, probably plugged and Unplugged them at least 12000 times, not once have I had a failure! 

For me it's convenient, it's essentially set and forget.

Enjoy the music..... Stop worrying about the the little things.


----------



## OctavianH

I liked the idea to power it from a powerbank. However, the jack itself does not inspire quality. What to say, pros and cons.


----------



## Ivodam

About the micro USB power socket - it seems that Chord have realized that it is not such a brilliant solution. The new phone stage Huei, which uses exactly the same body, like the Qutest, has got a power jack socket and a power switch, which I find excellent, both of them.
 I really hope that next Qutest Neo or whatever the name, will look the same (including the XLR outputs ).


----------



## Jon L

Ivodam said:


> About the micro USB power socket - it seems that Chord have realized that it is not such a brilliant solution. The new phone stage Huei, which uses exactly the same body, like the Qutest, has got a power jack socket and a power switch, which I find excellent, both of them.
> I really hope that next Qutest Neo or whatever the name, will look the same (including the XLR outputs ).



Great news!  Huei does seem to use the same chassis as Qutest, and I can't imagine the next Qutest version would not have the same power jack improvements.  Having a power switch would be nice, too.


----------



## Daniel Johnston

Ivodam said:


> About the micro USB power socket - it seems that Chord have realized that it is not such a brilliant solution. The new phone stage Huei, which uses exactly the same body, like the Qutest, has got a power jack socket and a power switch, which I find excellent, both of them.
> I really hope that next Qutest Neo or whatever the name, will look the same (including the XLR outputs ).



Downside is you'd have to use a wall wart specific to the unit. Right now you can use any microUSB 5V power supply.


----------



## HumanMedia

Daniel Johnston said:


> Downside is you'd have to use a wall wart specific to the unit. Right now you can use any microUSB 5V power supply.



What any industry standard 2.1mm DC barrel plug, as opposed to an Android phone charger?


----------



## Daniel Johnston

HumanMedia said:


> What any industry standard 2.1mm DC barrel plug, as opposed to an Android phone charger?



The other end. Right now you can use a multitude of 5v chargers/batteries depending on your setup.


----------



## Ivodam

Daniel Johnston said:


> Downside is you'd have to use a wall wart specific to the unit. Right now you can use any microUSB 5V power supply.



I can live with that.


----------



## dac64

The Output impedance of qutest is 0.025Ω.

Does this means that  it can drive earphone directly?

I have apple ipid earphone and my source has digital volume control

TIA


----------



## Deftone

dac64 said:


> The Output impedance of qutest is 0.025Ω.
> 
> Does this means that  it can drive earphone directly?
> 
> ...



Yes but you will need to use digital volume control.


----------



## dac64

Deftone said:


> Yes but you will need to use digital volume control.



Thanks for the info! Have to make sure before I burnt the output stage of the Qutest!  Btw, the input impedance of my apple earphones is 32 ohms.

Yes, my TV set up has a digital volume control. I just bought a Toslink to connect between the HMS and TV set up box.


----------



## linearly

dac64 said:


> The Output impedance of qutest is 0.025Ω.
> 
> Does this means that it can drive earphone directly?



So sad that we don't have a true desktop DAC/amp for headphones. I'm sure most of us started with Mojo and went with Hugo 2 after, but they bring a lot of negatives, like wanting to listen more and seeing battery is getting low, charging and getting too hot, etc. The next option is Hugo TT2, but it has a new chip, extra power, more suited for a high end device. Nothing in between. Qutest is great, BUT it needs a great headphone amp and interconnects. 

Wish there was a simple device, a Qutest with headphone out and a remote. No bluetooth, no batteries, no extra features. Keep it simple. Call it QuteTT maybe, price it between Qutest and Hugo 2. I would buy it right away, and I'm sure a lot more would.


----------



## dolphy007

linearly said:


> So sad that we don't have a true desktop DAC/amp for headphones. I'm sure most of us started with Mojo and went with Hugo 2 after, but they bring a lot of negatives, like wanting to listen more and seeing battery is getting low, charging and getting too hot, etc. The next option is Hugo TT2, but it has a new chip, extra power, more suited for a high end device. Nothing in between. Qutest is great, BUT it needs a great headphone amp and interconnects.
> 
> Wish there was a simple device, a Qutest with headphone out and a remote. No bluetooth, no batteries, no extra features. Keep it simple. Call it QuteTT maybe, price it between Qutest and Hugo 2. I would buy it right away, and I'm sure a lot more would.



TBH I have no idea what your complaint is about, the Hugo 2 is perfect. I'm asuming the headphone amp will be fixed, I've had the original Hugo for five years and it has never gotten hot and I always leave it powered on. If I could justify buyiing the Hugo 2 I would in a heart beat!!!


----------



## linearly

dolphy007 said:


> TBH I have no idea what your complaint is about, the Hugo 2 is perfect. I'm asuming the headphone amp will be fixed, I've had the original Hugo for five years and it has never gotten hot and I always leave it powered on. If I could justify buyiing the Hugo 2 I would in a heart beat!!!



I really have no complaints, I have owned both Mojo and Hugo 2, and while great devices, for both home and away use, at some point batteries will fail, and when that does happen an extra cost is added. I'm saying that now, for me, I'm looking for a plug and forget option, and the cheapest one is a TT2, that has a lot of features I don't really need. Sure DAC part is far superior to Qutest, but you have to start somewhere, and later, if I feel like it I can upgrade to a TT2.


----------



## Joe-Siow

linearly said:


> I really have no complaints, I have owned both Mojo and Hugo 2, and while great devices, for both home and away use, at some point batteries will fail, and when that does happen an extra cost is added. I'm saying that now, for me, I'm looking for a plug and forget option, and the cheapest one is a TT2, that has a lot of features I don't really need. Sure DAC part is far superior to Qutest, but *you have to start somewhere*, and later, if I feel like it I can upgrade to a TT2.



I would consider the Qutest the starting point for a desktop DAC before the TT2
If u are looking for a headphone amp with a DAC, what exactly is wrong with a Hugo2?

Think about it, Chord has the Mojo and Hugo2 for the portable crowd; while there are Qutest, TT2 and Dave for the desktop crowd.
Each of these 5 products cater to users at different price points

For a company the size of Chord, it does not make any business sense to have 4 DAC for the desktop segment
3 is the sweet spot; entry, mid-range and flagship


----------



## linearly

I've been reading this forum for a very long time, long before making my account. While searching for answers in this hobby I've found a thread here where a head-fier was comparing some headphone amps with audio samples. Between those amps there was a Mojo too. 

After listening to those samples I knew right away that I did audio wrong until then. And so it began. I got a Mojo right away. And was very happy with it. A few months passed by and I got the itch to audition the Hugo 2. And what a revelation that was. I couldn't get back to Mojo. So Hugo 2 gave me months of audio happiness.

Naturally I had to listen to DAVE to see what I'm missing, and oh boy it was a LOT. After months and months of savings finally was able to buy DAVE. And lets just say I really couldn't want more. Sure a good power cable made a difference, but was happy. 

Unfortunately, after having some personal problems, I had to sell the DAVE. And that was my biggest mistake in this hobby ever. After things settled down, I even spoke to the person I had sold it to and made him a better offer and he refused to give it back to me. 

Got the Qutest, and I can't really say anything bad about it, its amazing, but I mainly listen to music via headphones, and a lot is lost between the DAC and amp/interconnects. And here is where the Chord magic is, fewer parts between DAC- headphones that degrade sound. 

As a Chord customer I want something and I voice it on this forum. Its a discussion not an argument. I'm not saying anything bad about any Chord products I've had. All gave me happiness. But everyone has their moments in life, and today you want a portable device, tomorrow you upgrade to a TT2, who knows. At the moment I'm not using anything Chord since a product that fits my needs today doesn't exist. 

If it makes sense or not to add another product to their range that's for them to decide, we as customers can only hope a new product ticks our boxes and we decide to acquire it or not.


----------



## OctavianH

A very nice story you have there. In my case, Chord does not make tube amplifiers so Qutest was the only thing I needed: the DAC. Of course, TT2 or Dave are for sure much better but yes, I am not affording Dave and also the costs involved in amplifier part. And the ability to roll some interconnects might be fun, sometimes.


----------



## rudy49

has anyone compared the Qutest to the NAD D1050?
thanks


----------



## GreenBow

EISA Awards are in. 

The Qutest won EISA DAC 2019 - 2020.


----------



## lhau

What is EISA?


----------



## lhau

Has anyone tried a Audioquest Jitterbug on Qutest? was there any good effect?


----------



## hornytoad

lhau said:


> Has anyone tried a Audioquest Jitterbug on Qutest? was there any good effect?


I tried one on my computer and it had ZERO effect.


----------



## JezR

lhau said:


> What is EISA?



https://www.eisa.eu/awards/chord-electronics-qutest/


----------



## Arniesb

lhau said:


> Has anyone tried a Audioquest Jitterbug on Qutest? was there any good effect?


Worst thing ever. Some delusional folks will say that rolled of top end is result of redused emi, but it is because of added resistance. If you want reduced resolution go ahead, but i would suggest better buy decent usb cable or Usb decrapifier.


----------



## BlakeT (Aug 27, 2019)

Jitterbugs suck and as noted by @Arniesb they roll off the top end.  Try two at a time as suggested by Audioquest and you can double your misery.  I suppose if your system is bright/harsh sounding, they may serve as a band-aid.

IMHO of course.


----------



## Qute Beats

dac64 said:


> The Output impedance of qutest is 0.025Ω.
> 
> Does this means that  it can drive earphone directly?
> 
> ...


I ran my HD650s direct for a while using volume control on software, no issues at all, but watch to voltage - start at 1V.  You get more transparency without amp, but in the end I went back to amp for convenience.


----------



## BlakeT (Aug 27, 2019)

Amberlamps said:


> What kind of amps are you all using with Qutest ?
> 
> I'm thinking of getting a few things, one potential item is an amp for TT2, but I'm not 100% sure yet, but what are you all using with your Qutests ?
> 
> Cheers



My Qutest is used in my desktop system in my office at work.  I am using it with an Aesthetix Calypso preamp and Blue Circle BC-28 power amp to Scansonic monitor speakers.  It is _bueno!_


----------



## Qute Beats

Jon L said:


> My BIGGEST complaint with the Qutest, having nothing to do with sound quality, is that flimsy micro USB jack for power input.  It's a piece of junk, and it does not even require a fall to go bad and become intermittent.  If Chord is listening, please replace it with something more reliable


never had any issues at all with the PSUs micro USB connection..


----------



## Qute Beats

BlakeT said:


> Jitterbugs suck and as noted by @Arniesb they roll off the top end.  Try two at a time a double your misery.  I suppose if your system is bright/harsh sounding, they may serve as a band-aid.
> 
> IMHO of course.


I gave up on all the USB cleaners, no negatives I found, just no point them being there.  They do work with lesser DACs, but Chord's don't benefit as so well designed in the first place.


----------



## Qute Beats

linearly said:


> So sad that we don't have a true desktop DAC/amp for headphones. I'm sure most of us started with Mojo and went with Hugo 2 after, but they bring a lot of negatives, like wanting to listen more and seeing battery is getting low, charging and getting too hot, etc. The next option is Hugo TT2, but it has a new chip, extra power, more suited for a high end device. Nothing in between. Qutest is great, BUT it needs a great headphone amp and interconnects.
> 
> Wish there was a simple device, a Qutest with headphone out and a remote. No bluetooth, no batteries, no extra features. Keep it simple. Call it QuteTT maybe, price it between Qutest and Hugo 2. I would buy it right away, and I'm sure a lot more would.


So a just Hugo2 without batteries, not sure there's much to gain there, Hugo2 can run on power plug fine and folk will still want to buy a better amps..  TT2 is more expensive, but amp stage is so good there's no need for the additional cost of amp.


----------



## Triode User

BlakeT said:


> Jitterbugs suck and as noted by @Arniesb they roll off the top end.  Try two at a time as suggested by Audioquest and you can double your misery.  I suppose if your system is bright/harsh sounding, they may serve as a band-aid.
> 
> IMHO of course.



But consider how they might be rolling off the top end. They are not altering the music signal so the rolled off top end you mention is more likely removal of RF noise. If you prefer it with that top end then are you are really saying is that you like the sound of RF noise? Just a thought.


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> But consider how they might be rolling off the top end. They are not altering the music signal so the rolled off top end you mention is more likely removal of RF noise. If you prefer it with that top end then are you are really saying is that you like the sound of RF noise? Just a thought.


Guess what i have silver usb cable which have a lot more extension than Jitterbug and at the same time way lower noise floor.
1 thing is bright and 1 is noise free.
Ss amps are a lot more queit than tube amps and they are brighter.
Almost all decrapifiers are brighter than Jitterbug too and way have much lower noise floor.


----------



## linearly

Qute Beats said:


> I ran my HD650s direct for a while using volume control on software, no issues at all, but watch to voltage - start at 1V. You get more transparency without amp, but in the end I went back to amp for convenience.



That would solve all my issues right now, how does one do that? I've the same headphones, do you need some kind of special adapter RCA to headphone jack female? And use digital volume in Windows? Is 1V a lot for 300ohm headphones? I mean is there a risk of blowing the drivers up if an app goes full volume? Thank you.


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> Guess what i have silver usb cable which have a lot more extension than Jitterbug and at the same time way lower noise floor.
> 1 thing is bright and 1 is noise free.
> Ss amps are a lot more queit than tube amps and they are brighter.
> Almost all decrapifiers are brighter than Jitterbug too and way have much lower noise floor.



Rob Watts has mentioned previously that some 'decrapifiers' can actually add noise into the digital chain due to their power supplies etc. Hence why they might sound brighter.


----------



## Qute Beats

linearly said:


> That would solve all my issues right now, how does one do that? I've the same headphones, do you need some kind of special adapter RCA to headphone jack female? And use digital volume in Windows? Is 1V a lot for 300ohm headphones? I mean is there a risk of blowing the drivers up if an app goes full volume? Thank you.


Two ways to do it.  You can buy a RCA-headphone adaptor, which was what I did first to experiment - this was mine
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B011SS0TVM/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I then made up a headphone cable direct into RCA plugs to remove adaptor, relatively easy, soldering the wires into the small headphones plugs was the tricky part as not much room to work with.  Just get some of these, cable and makke sure you get the +/- the right way around.




I had no issues, but yeah just watch the volume on the software as otherwise can go quite loud.  Using MusicBee I found ~50% volume OK and as far as I could work out at around this level there is no loss of sound quality, but technically not bit perfect.  A couple of time I had accidentally played loud and had to quickly reduce volume, but no damage was done.  Blasting at the max volume for a while could be another story though, as would using a much lower impedance headphone I imagine.
But please do research it yourself first as I obviously wouldn't want to you do mess anything up based on what I've said here.


----------



## linearly

Qute Beats said:


> But please do research it yourself first as I obviously wouldn't want to you do mess anything up based on what I've said here.



Will look into this for sure, thanks so much for explaining it to me. I also saw there are digital volume controls with RCA in jack out, with potentiometer and remote. Now I have to buy Qutest again... Anyways I'm confident I will make this work somehow. Other option is buying a Mojo and replace the battery with super caps, there was someone that did it in the Mojo thread, but that sounds so much more complicated. 'Tinkering' about it.


----------



## Romi54

@Rob Watts 

How much power (A) does the Qutest use at most?


----------



## linearly (Sep 7, 2019)

So this morning I decided to plug my 650's to direct RCA out of my current DAC, it has 2Vrms. Was so scared at first, got the volume lowest possible, expected to blow up my headphones. That didn't happen, had to get it at about 60% volume at 2v to sound about right. What struck me was how much better direct DAC was compared to the built in headphone amp.

There are a few options for volume control, software, digital or analog. I guess the best one would be analog with a pot and nothing more. Digital ones have a remote control with RCA in RCA out.

For now I've decided to go with Schiit SYS, I can have both headphones and active speakers plugged in and switch between them. Once I get everything will do some tests with Qutest RCA -> Hp direct with software volume control vs Schiit SYS.

Also I have no idea what I'm doing and I did this at my own risk. Please be careful.

Probably there are a lot of audio downsides to this option, that I'm not aware of, but this is what fits me best right now.


----------



## mmhifi

OK, micro-usb power port of my 4-month old Qutest failed to work properly... I had intermittent lost of power.
My dealer replaces the unit for new one.


----------



## Baten (Sep 2, 2019)

linearly said:


> So this morning I decided to plug my 650's to direct RCA out of my current DAC, it has 2Vrms. Was so scared at first, got the volume lowest possible, expected to blow up my headphones. That didn't happen, had to get it at about 60% volume at 2v to sound about right. What struck me was how much better direct DAC was compared to the built in headphone amp.
> 
> This isn't a Chord product, but *I can't see or better say hear any downsides to this.*



There is a pretty big downside. Most DACs are not meant for direct drive and have an impedance output sometimes up to hundreds of Ω. Not as bad with planars which don't care about impedance, or higher impedance headphones as HD600/HD800 etc, but this will likely sound *BAD* with sensitive headphones.

For example, SDAC balanced on massdrop. It has a 3.5mm output meant for line-out to other device. If you plug a headphone into it, it actually has impedance output of *150Ω*. This is not good to direct drive headphones ...  what is the impedance output of Qutest over its RCA outputs? I've no idea.


----------



## linearly

Baten said:


> There is a pretty big downside. Most DACs are not meant for direct drive and have an impedance output sometimes up to hundreds of Ω. Not as bad with planars which don't care about impedance, or higher impedance headphones as HD600/HD800 etc, but this will likely sound *BAD* with sensitive headphones.
> 
> For example, SDAC balanced on massdrop. It has a 3.5mm output meant for line-out to other device. If you plug a headphone into it, it actually has impedance output of *150Ω*. This is not good to direct drive headphones ... what is the impedance output of Qutest over its RCA outputs?
> 
> No idea.



Yeah I know, I'm in uncharted waters here. Will use Qutest with Schiit SYS for volume control into my HD650's. On the first page on this thread it says Output impedance: 0.025Ω for Qutest. I really don't know what to do, if this will degrade the sound somehow that I'm not aware of. If that is the case I'm willing to forgo my battery bias and get the Hugo 2.


----------



## Baten

linearly said:


> Yeah I know, I'm in uncharted waters here. Will use Qutest with Schiit SYS for volume control into my HD650's. On the first page on this thread it says Output impedance: 0.025Ω for Qutest. I really don't know what to do, if this will degrade the sound somehow that I'm not aware of. If that is the case I'm willing to forgo my battery bias and get the Hugo 2.


Why not just use qutest and digital volume control? Since qutest has such low impedance it will work. Adding SYS will only degrade things!


----------



## kerisabe (Sep 2, 2019)

Does anyone knows if there is an actual USB A plug that is pure silver? Im looking to replace the plugs/connectors for my active grounding cables and the cables itself to pure silver conductors. Any suggestions would be appreciated. (Found bnc/spades/stereo jack that are pure silver; except usb A plug)


----------



## blueninjasix

linearly said:


> Yeah I know, I'm in uncharted waters here. Will use Qutest with Schiit SYS for volume control into my HD650's. On the first page on this thread it says Output impedance: 0.025Ω for Qutest. I really don't know what to do, if this will degrade the sound somehow that I'm not aware of. If that is the case I'm willing to forgo my battery bias and get the Hugo 2.


I mainly use Qutest with my set amps and speakers but for occasional headphone listening I've recently acquired a Liquid Spark which is a cheap as chips addition and can easily drive HD650. I user Beyerdynamic dt 880.


----------



## linearly

After thinking about all the positives and negatives between Qutest direct headphones and Hugo 2 I decided to go with the latter (again). I'm sure Qutest would work with rca direct to my 300ohm phones, but what would happen if in the future I want an upgrade to lower impedance ones? Too many complications. And maybe there are sound downsides aswell. Who knows. 

So I went to audition to Hugo 2 and see if it still sounds as I remember it from a year ago. Next to it there was the TT2 so naturally I had to listen to it and see what the hype is about. Hugo 2 was exactly as I remember it, no surprise there. The awe struck when I started listening to the TT2. I was expecting slighty better then Hugo 2 performance, to hear differences only with some songs not all etc. But the bump in audio quality from Hugo 2 is obvious right away, much closer to DAVE then the other way around. The sound has weight to it, it flows better, also warmer but not muddier, it sounds amazing. I'm very glad I gave TT2 a listen as it made the decision for me so much easier. Harder for my wallet, but easier for me.


----------



## Qute Beats

linearly said:


> After thinking about all the positives and negatives between Qutest direct headphones and Hugo 2 I decided to go with the latter (again). I'm sure Qutest would work with rca direct to my 300ohm phones, but what would happen if in the future I want an upgrade to lower impedance ones? Too many complications. And maybe there are sound downsides aswell. Who knows.
> 
> So I went to audition to Hugo 2 and see if it still sounds as I remember it from a year ago. Next to it there was the TT2 so naturally I had to listen to it and see what the hype is about. Hugo 2 was exactly as I remember it, no surprise there. The awe struck when I started listening to the TT2. I was expecting slighty better then Hugo 2 performance, to hear differences only with some songs not all etc. But the bump in audio quality from Hugo 2 is obvious right away, much closer to DAVE then the other way around. The sound has weight to it, it flows better, also warmer but not muddier, it sounds amazing. I'm very glad I gave TT2 a listen as it made the decision for me so much easier. Harder for my wallet, but easier for me.


You bought the TT2?  Congrats!  I moved from Qutest to TT2 after a demo too, was very happy with Qutest but after the TT2 experience just had to get one, wallet be damned..


----------



## linearly

Qute Beats said:


> You bought the TT2? Congrats! I moved from Qutest to TT2 after a demo too, was very happy with Qutest but after the TT2 experience just had to get one, wallet be damned..



Thank you. Didn't get it yet but hopefully soon. After owning DAVE I knew it was very hard to get a replacement thats why I wanted a Qutest until I got the funds for another DAVE. Did not expect TT2 to be this close to DAVE, of course DAVE scales exceptionally well with high end gear, and thats the way I felt when I owned it. DAVE needs a good power cable, expensive speakers/amps/headphones to make it shine. Now with my HD650's the difference between TT2 and DAVE should be much smaller. Also with the TT2 you have the peace of mind that you can try any headphone you want and not have to worry about driving them, so future proof too. Qutest, while I owned it was great too, but my amp didn't do it justice, so with the price of a good hp amp and great interconnects you get very close to the TT2. I'm very glad I gave TT2 a listen before deciding and I think on the long run I saved money that I would've spent on different hp amps until I found one that I like.


----------



## hasos (Sep 19, 2019)

Has anyone compared Chord Qutest + Usbridge (or other streamer) vs Lumin D2 (with internal dac) SQ? I will be grateful for the opinion.


----------



## dinus777

hasos said:


> Has anyone compared Chord Qutest + Usbridge (or other streamer) vs Lumin D2 (with internal dac) SQ? I will be grateful for the opinion.



Adding to that, i'm also interested if anyone have ALLO DigiOne Signature + Chord Qutest  ? 
I've read a lot very possitive reviews about it.
Thanks in advance !


----------



## miketlse

dinus777 said:


> Adding to that, i'm also interested if anyone have ALLO DigiOne Signature + Chord Qutest  ?
> I've read a lot very possitive reviews about it.
> Thanks in advance !


There are a few posts on the chord threads from owners happily using usbridge or digione. The disagreements seem to be more about whether to use usb or optical, and that defines which of those two pieces of kit to use.


----------



## kumar402

dinus777 said:


> Adding to that, i'm also interested if anyone have ALLO DigiOne Signature + Chord Qutest  ?
> I've read a lot very possitive reviews about it.
> Thanks in advance !


I used this combo when I had Qutest. Digione in general is a very good streamer. Easily integrate with Roon, provides airplay.
However you have to use LIFEPO4 batteries or LPS for powering the clean side. Digione provides weight and heft to sound, removes digital glares and BNC connector works like charm.
Do also take a look at PI2AES, It has all the output you will ever need - AES, I2S, Opical, BNC, RCA Coax


----------



## jeremya

@Rob Watts How much current (peak? constantly?) does Qutest draw from the *signal *side?

*Context:*
I was experimenting with a USB configuration that allows me to defeat the VBUS pathway and I noticed that when VBUS is eliminated, the Qutest disappears from Roon (even mid-playback). Re-connecting VBUS causes it to re-appear a few seconds later. So, I figure it's doing the standard USB device thing and using VBUS for detecting the presence of an upstream device.

I would suppose that the _majority _of the power for Qutest is provided via the 5V 1A micro-USB *power cable *connection... but knowing how much current the *signal cable *must also supply would enable some interesting experimentation with alternate supplies and sources.

Thanks in advance!

p.s. Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere (my search-fu failed me!).


----------



## miketlse

jeremya said:


> @Rob Watts How much current (peak? constantly?) does Qutest draw from the *signal *side?
> 
> *Context:*
> I was experimenting with a USB configuration that allows me to defeat the VBUS pathway and I noticed that when VBUS is eliminated, the Qutest disappears from Roon (even mid-playback). Re-connecting VBUS causes it to re-appear a few seconds later. So, I figure it's doing the standard USB device thing and using VBUS for detecting the presence of an upstream device.
> ...


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-222#post-14839706


----------



## jeremya

miketlse said:


> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-222#post-14839706



Thanks, @miketlse! Relevant bit:


Rob Watts said:


> Yes the USB VBUS powers the USB decoder and the source side of the galvanic isolator.



I recall reading that post once upon a time, and reading it again fills in my mental model of how Qutest is built (now that I've spent quality time with one). Thanks!

However, my original question remains unanswered. I'm hoping Rob will get 'round to it eventually :



jeremya said:


> @Rob Watts How much current (peak? constantly?) does Qutest draw from the *signal *side?


----------



## miketlse

jeremya said:


> Thanks, @miketlse! Relevant bit:
> 
> 
> I recall reading that post once upon a time, and reading it again fills in my mental model of how Qutest is built (now that I've spent quality time with one). Thanks!
> ...


The USB decoder normally uses a few mW in the other Chord dacs, which would need only a few mA at 5V.
Still if you need a more precise answer, you will have to wait for Rob.


----------



## Rob Watts

The USB decoder and isolation circuitry consumes about 0.3 W, so you are looking at 60 mA of current drawn on VBUS.


----------



## jeremya (Sep 20, 2019)

Thanks, @Rob Watts!

By the way, I'm loving the Qutest. Lovely piece of kit. =^)


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 22, 2019)

Hi ppl.
Recently joined the Qutest team!
Acquired myself one used for 1025 euros.
And tried feeding my HD800 straight out using digital volume in foobar. Have A-B with Mojo. And i can confirm that the analog stage of Qutest is more than capable of driving a 300ohm load.
And oh i like the transparency over Mojo!
I do guess adding an extra cap close to the 5v power inlet would give benefit cause of the more current being drawn specially for the peaks.
I'm also sure it works better with high impedance HP over low ones, its just the law of ohm: power is voltage x current and higher impedance use less current for the same power, so better for the op stage.


----------



## jwbrent

Love the Qutest! I took a more conventional path by using a Headamp Pico Power as my amp to drive my D8000/Utopia. Both of these headphones easily reveal the resolution and transparency of the Qutest. One day, I’d love to buy a Hugo TT 2, but for now, I’m all grins when I listen to my headphones.


----------



## Baten

Reactcore said:


> Hi ppl.
> Recently joined the Qutest team!
> Acquired myself one used for 1025 euros.
> And tried feeding my HD800 straight out using digital volume in foobar. Have A-B with Mojo. And i can confirm that the analog stage of Qutest is more than capable of driving a 300ohm load.
> ...


Nice set-up!


----------



## Reactcore

Thx B, this is as easy as it gets. And the less parts in the chain.. the less signal loss. I have a Questyle CMA400i current mode HP amp which is rated DC-600khz frequency response which gives sublime result too. But somehow direct drive out of Qutest squeezes just the last detail out.
I tried really bassy tracks also shortly on ear splitting level and the sound stays very clear and won't get muddy. I believe the op stage is just like Mojo's one.


----------



## nwavesailor

I will apologize in advance. In 282 pages I am sure this has been covered. I just bought a Qutest and want to use a 7th gen iPod or iPhone 11 for my source. 

I understand that I need a Apple CCK cable. What  is the female USB end of that CCK cable, is it USB C?
I think also need a USB B (?) cable end for the Qutest input. So what USB cable ends (male C and male B ?) do I need to connect to the CCK? I see that Moon audio has an Silver Dragon option but there must be another option. 

There are tons of 'how to connect a Mojo using iPhone / iPod' but it's not as easy to find the correct cables for the Qutest connection.
When the Qutest arrives, I want to be sure I am set with the proper cables for this setup!


----------



## Reactcore

Any cck has usb a female connection. So with the supplied stock usb a male to usb b male cable youre set.

I did notice the cutest does draw some current for the connection up signalling, draining a source's battery faster than neccessary.


----------



## Jon L (Sep 22, 2019)

Reactcore said:


> Hi ppl.
> Recently joined the Qutest team!
> Acquired myself one used for 1025 euros.
> And tried feeding my HD800 straight out using digital volume in foobar. Have A-B with Mojo. And i can confirm that the analog stage of Qutest is more than capable of driving a 300ohm load.
> ...



Can't see the back side.  What is that Y splitter that goes from Qutest RCA output jacks to the headphone?


----------



## Clemmaster

A female 1/4 jack.


----------



## Ivodam (Sep 23, 2019)

Baten said:


> Why not just use qutest and digital volume control? Since qutest has such low impedance it will work. Adding SYS will only degrade things!



Using some passive volume control will degrade things a bit, this is true, but digital volume control, for example with Foobar, you can use only with PCM format, not with DSD native! I have tried it all and it sounds best when you put the signal from the Qutest through a decent real preamplifier and power amp for floorstanders, or through an earphones amp for earphones.


----------



## nwavesailor

Reactcore said:


> Any cck has usb a female connection. So with the supplied stock usb a male to usb b male cable youre set.
> 
> I did notice the cutest does draw some current for the connection up signalling, draining a source's battery faster than neccessary.



Thanks for that, Reactcore! 
It looks like I may just need to snag an official Apple CCK adapter and I should be set.


----------



## Baten

Ivodam said:


> Using some passive volume control will degrade things a bit, this is true, but digital volume control, for example with Foobar, you can use only with PCM format, not with DSD native! I have tried it all and it sounds best when you put the signal from the Qutest trough a decent real preamplifier and power amp for floorstanders, or through an earphones amp for earphones.


Chord DACs don't do real DSD native, they convert internally to PCM.


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 23, 2019)

Ivodam said:


> you can use only with PCM format, not with DSD native!



Ah you have a point there. I havent tried true DSD yet in foobar, theres no control over native, at least until some clever guy comes with a plugin somehow.
Have to let f2k convert those to PCM then.
Does'nt that actually happen inside the dac first anyway since the wta process is applied to pcm waveforms
Or use my amp. Will try to hear the differences in Q.


----------



## Ivodam

Baten said:


> Chord DACs don't do real DSD native, they convert internally to PCM.



I think this is not true, where did you read it? The manual states in a very clear way: 
*native DSD via ASIO.*

Anyway, I would like to warn once again: the software players digital volume control does not work in DSD mode and the signal is output to its maximum. If somebody listens to some wav file through the Foobar, using direct output to the earphones, and downloads a DSD file and decides curiously to check how it plays, when switching over in the Foobar to DSD output mode and if having the earphones on, one might blow up his own ear-drums, no joke about it. I have had similar experience once, luckily with floorstanders, I nearly blew out the windows...


----------



## Baten

Ivodam said:


> I think this is not true, where did you read it? The manual states in a very clear way:
> *native DSD via ASIO.*
> 
> Anyway, I would like to warn once again: the software players digital volume control does not work in DSD mode and the signal is output to its maximum. If somebody listens to some wav file through the Foobar, using direct output to the earphones, and downloads a DSD file and decides curiously to check how it plays, when switching over in the Foobar to DSD output mode and if having the earphones on, one might blow up his own ear-drums, no joke about it. I have had similar experience once, luckily with floorstanders, I nearly blew out the windows...


This is because the foobar dsd/sacd plug-in will not use digital volume control since that would lose the bit-perfectness.

Anyway I'm on mobile so someone else will have to provide the reference, but DSD converts to PCM in Chord, otherwise their high-tap digital filter cannot work yeah.


----------



## Reactcore

Leaves the question which is better at the conversion, i bet Chord since theres always timing involved..


----------



## Ivodam

Reactcore said:


> Ah you have a point there. I havent tried true DSD yet in foobar, theres no control over native, at least until some clever guy comes with a plugin somehow.
> Have to let f2k convert those to PCM then.
> Does'nt that actually happen inside the dac first anyway since the wta process is applied to pcm waveforms
> Or use my amp. Will try to hear the differences in Q.



This is not possible, to have some plug-in or something to control volume in the software player with DSD format - this is the nature of DSD - the direct streaming. It is not only Foobar, but no player, JRiver, or HQPlayer, etc. can control the volume of a DSD playback. 
Converting it to PCM I think brings always some quality loss...


----------



## Ivodam (Sep 23, 2019)

Reactcore said:


> Leaves the question which is better at the conversion, i bet Chord since theres always timing involved..



No question about it, if there is a conversion, the internal hardware conversion within Chord will be better.
But I would expect a straight statement on the part of Chord at this stage, because when the manual says that the DAC accepts native DSD, I expect that this means the DAC's chip is capable of direct reading and decoding and converting the DSD file to analogue signal. If we have to go to PCM first, I prefer to buy high resolution wav files, not DSD. But we have the right to know were we stand.


----------



## Rob Watts

Baten said:


> Chord DACs don't do real DSD native, they convert internally to PCM.



It would be trivially easy for me to do a native DSD DAC conversion using pulse array - so why don't I? It's because DSD to analogue conversion is horribly sensitive to clock jitter, and requires complex analogue filtering to remove the huge amount of noise above 20 kHz - and to do it efficiently enough so that noise floor modulation is not an issue in amps down chain would require hugely complex analogue filters - all adding distortion and noise, and more importantly the extra analogue complexity would degrade transparency.

The sensitivity to clock jitter is down to the fact that DSD is switching dependent - that is the effective switching rate changes with signal level. This induces signal dependent glitch noise, which creates large amounts of distortion. Moreover, this jitter errors also creates noise that is dependent upon the DSD modulator, so modulation noise gets decoded and inter-modulated into the audio bandwidth - this creates the well known idle pattern noise (a kind of gurgle sound, particularly noticeable when the music signal stops, and the DSD modulator recovers to zero idle patterns).

So if you want more distortion and noise, gurgle sounds, increased noise floor modulation and reduced transparency than go for the simple native DSD DAC. 



Ivodam said:


> I think this is not true, where did you read it? The manual states in a very clear way:
> *native DSD via ASIO.*
> 
> Anyway, I would like to warn once again: the software players digital volume control does not work in DSD mode and the signal is output to its maximum. If somebody listens to some wav file through the Foobar, using direct output to the earphones, and downloads a DSD file and decides curiously to check how it plays, when switching over in the Foobar to DSD output mode and if having the earphones on, one might blow up his own ear-drums, no joke about it. I have had similar experience once, luckily with floorstanders, I nearly blew out the windows...



The confusion here is that there are two types of native DSD. There is the conversion to analogue, where you take the DSD bit-stream and essentially low pass filter it - so called native DSD conversion - with all the SQ and measurement problems this entails as I discussed above.

The second meaning of native DSD concerns not the method to convert to analogue, but the method to get the data to the DAC - the interface protocol. We have two options - DoP transmission, or native transmission. With DoP you transmit it via regular PCM, with a 8 bit header that tells the DAC that the bottom 16 bits is regular DSD data. With native DSD transmission, the data has no overhead, and is just DSD data transmitted, so the DAC receives a bit clock, DSD data left and DSD data right. Native DSD is more efficient, and you can run up-to DSD 512 - but the downside is that it is only via ASIO. DoP has the header data, so is less efficient, so will work only to DSD 256. The DAC than has to decode the DoP file to extract the DSD data - in an FPGA this decoding is trivial to do.

Both DoP and native DSD ASIO transmission protocols transmits identical data, and the DAC will receive identical data irrespective of whether it is DoP or native transmission.


----------



## Baten

Rob Watts said:


> It would be trivially easy for me to do a native DSD DAC conversion using pulse array - so why don't I? It's because DSD to analogue conversion is horribly sensitive to clock jitter, and requires complex analogue filtering to remove the huge amount of noise above 20 kHz - and to do it efficiently enough so that noise floor modulation is not an issue in amps down chain would require hugely complex analogue filters - all adding distortion and noise, and more importantly the extra analogue complexity would degrade transparency.
> 
> The sensitivity to clock jitter is down to the fact that DSD is switching dependent - that is the effective switching rate changes with signal level. This induces signal dependent glitch noise, which creates large amounts of distortion. Moreover, this jitter errors also creates noise that is dependent upon the DSD modulator, so modulation noise gets decoded and inter-modulated into the audio bandwidth - this creates the well known idle pattern noise (a kind of gurgle sound, particularly noticeable when the music signal stops, and the DSD modulator recovers to zero idle patterns).
> 
> ...


Awesome, thank you for the detailed reply!


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 23, 2019)

So it means true DSD decoders inevitably need passive analog filtering in order to remove unwanted noise with all the degradation that comes with it... hmm
And conversion to PCM can be done all in the digital domain paving the way for better controlled signal reconstruction with less filter components in the analog stage.

So if this is true, would a standard PC be capable enough to convert a DSD stream (or file as a whole) without signall loss to PCM and let the D/A recontruction for the dac. Or do we create imperfections in this way?


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 23, 2019)

But then what would be the best sample rate, i guess highest wouldnt always be the best choice.. it should be original.. but this is comparing apples with pears. Lol

At least i can control my volume digitally and drive my phones direct out of Qutest with DSD files.


----------



## Ivodam

Rob Watts said:


> It would be trivially easy for me to do a native DSD DAC conversion using pulse array - so why don't I? It's because DSD to analogue conversion is horribly sensitive to clock jitter, and requires complex analogue filtering to remove the huge amount of noise above 20 kHz - and to do it efficiently enough so that noise floor modulation is not an issue in amps down chain would require hugely complex analogue filters - all adding distortion and noise, and more importantly the extra analogue complexity would degrade transparency.
> 
> The sensitivity to clock jitter is down to the fact that DSD is switching dependent - that is the effective switching rate changes with signal level. This induces signal dependent glitch noise, which creates large amounts of distortion. Moreover, this jitter errors also creates noise that is dependent upon the DSD modulator, so modulation noise gets decoded and inter-modulated into the audio bandwidth - this creates the well known idle pattern noise (a kind of gurgle sound, particularly noticeable when the music signal stops, and the DSD modulator recovers to zero idle patterns).
> 
> ...



Thank you most sincerely, Rob, this is really very interesting information for me. 
I am sure that you at Chord are trying to do the best, but the details, described by you give me a lot of material to think generally about the need for the DSD format...


----------



## nwavesailor

I would like to feed 2 headphone amps from the Qutest RCA outputs. I would rather not have to change the RCA's to do this. Has anyone used this Audioquest adapter?


----------



## Hooster

nwavesailor said:


> I would like to feed 2 headphone amps from the Qutest RCA outputs. I would rather not have to change the RCA's to do this. Has anyone used this Audioquest adapter?



Looks fine, as long as the extra strain does not damage the Qutest output socket.


----------



## nwavesailor (Sep 24, 2019)

Thanks, Hooster!

Your right, it may be OK as long as it doesn't put too much stress on the Qutest's RCA's.
There are short cables that do essentially the same thing, but then there is the adapter cable wire and the RCA IC wire. At least this option doesn't introduce any additional
wire between the DAC and amp(s).

I will also look at short 6" - 12" Y splitter cables.


----------



## GreenBow

nwavesailor said:


> Thanks, Hooster!
> 
> Your right, it may be OK as long as it doesn't put too much stress on the Qutest's RCA's.
> There are short cables that do essentially the same thing, but then there is the adapter cable wire and the RCA IC wire. At least this option doesn't introduce any additional
> wire between the DAC and amp(s).



I would be thinking the same. Weight of the whole connection on the Qutest output socket. It could be fine, but I think I would look of a cable version.


----------



## Reactcore

Also b sure those amps are mains isolated and no earth loops are created.. unless theyre battery operated.


----------



## RuiNguyen

I used to own a Schiit Yggdrasil Analog 2 but it didn't get along well with my previous systems and I decided to sell the Yggy and kept the Qutest. I'm thinking about buying a Dave to replace the Qutest or keep the Qutest and buy a Hugo MScaler. I want to ask if any of you have chance to compare the MScaler + Qutest to the standalone Dave?


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 26, 2019)

Hey welcome to club headfi
..and sorry for your wallet
had to say this once lol


----------



## betula

RuiNguyen said:


> I used to own a Schiit Yggdrasil Analog 2 but it didn't get along well with my previous systems and I decided to sell the Yggy and kept the Qutest. I'm thinking about buying a Dave to replace the Qutest or keep the Qutest and buy a Hugo MScaler. I want to ask if any of you have chance to compare the MScaler + Qutest to the standalone Dave?


Nice first post. 
I wouldn't forget the TT2. TT2 with MSC is said to be better than Dave alone. Qutest with MSC vs. TT2 alone is a matter of debate. 
All I can say is that my TT2 absolutely slaughters Qutest paired with _any_ amps. (And I did love my Qutest with the Taurus MKII.)


----------



## Reactcore

I wonder how many daves there are circulating by now.. have found one online 2nd hand for little over €2k. But believed it was fake and didnt go on with it.


----------



## betula

Reactcore said:


> I wonder how many daves there are circulating by now.. have found one online 2nd hand for little over €2k. But believed it was fake and didnt go on with it.


IMO you have probably missed an exceptional secondhand deal. Who would sell a used Dave for €2k?
TBH I don't think there is a huge secondhand market for fake Daves...


----------



## Reactcore

By fake i mean its a scum. Someone with only 1 sentence description, 1 picture trying to get money off others.


----------



## JohnM-73

betula said:


> IMO you have probably missed an exceptional secondhand deal. Who would sell a used Dave for €2k?
> TBH I don't think there is a huge secondhand market for fake Daves...



I actually got in touch with the guy (couldn't help myself, was feeling cantankerous!) and exchanged some chit-chat. When I asked why, he said he was selling it cheap as he wanted to buy a new pair of speakers quickly, and it hadn’t sold at a higher price. He said he could take a photo of himself with his family so I knew it was legit (!). I countered with can you take a photo of yourself next to Dave, holding a bill or official letter that clearly features your address and the serial number of the Dave, before I make payment?
He went completely quiet after that.
Funny that........ 
Hope there’s nobody out there that actually falls for this.


----------



## Reactcore

Right!
Well but we less fortunate can't be blamed of dreaming to find this one exception.


----------



## OctavianH

Nobody will sell Dave at that price. I would say if you find a 2nd hand unit around 6K you are lucky.


----------



## Reactcore

See.. who believes this?


----------



## betula

OctavianH said:


> Nobody will sell Dave at that price. I would say if you find a 2nd hand unit around 6K you are lucky.


I agree. No secondhand Dave will go for less than 4-6K. And even with a 4-6K deal you can count yourself lucky.
No good Dave will sell under 6k IMO.
TT2 at 4K is an exceptional deal IMO...


----------



## Reactcore

Theres also a Blu mkII for 1700 for sale there..


----------



## 474194

Reactcore said:


> Hi ppl.
> Recently joined the Qutest team!
> Acquired myself one used for 1025 euros.
> And tried feeding my HD800 straight out using digital volume in foobar. Have A-B with Mojo. And i can confirm that the analog stage of Qutest is more than capable of driving a 300ohm load.
> ...



This may make for a good PC gaming setup.  Can you control the volume natively in Windows 10?

I enjoyed the gaming sound effects the Mojo produced, but Mojo or Hugo2 not really practical for this use case.


----------



## Hooster

RuiNguyen said:


> I used to own a Schiit Yggdrasil Analog 2 but it didn't get along well with my previous systems and I decided to sell the Yggy and kept the Qutest. I'm thinking about buying a Dave to replace the Qutest or keep the Qutest and buy a Hugo MScaler. I want to ask if any of you have chance to compare the MScaler + Qutest to the standalone Dave?



Have you thought about TT2? Some seem to be saying that that has surpassed Dave.


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 26, 2019)

Windows mixer should just work as long your game doesnt make use of wasapi and dont have its own volume control.
Qutest uses the same win driver as Mojo
If u can change volume in windows with Mojo connected then im sure with Qutest it works.


----------



## RuiNguyen

betula said:


> Nice first post.
> I wouldn't forget the TT2. TT2 with MSC is said to be better than Dave alone. Qutest with MSC vs. TT2 alone is a matter of debate.
> All I can say is that my TT2 absolutely slaughters Qutest paired with _any_ amps. (And I did love my Qutest with the Taurus MKII.)





Hooster said:


> Have you thought about TT2? Some seem to be saying that that has surpassed Dave.


I would contact the dealer in my region if they have the TT2 + MScaler and Dave to make comparison


----------



## schnesim

AC-12 said:


> This may make for a good PC gaming setup.  Can you control the volume natively in Windows 10?
> 
> I enjoyed the gaming sound effects the Mojo produced, but Mojo or Hugo2 not really practical for this use case.



I'm wondering if the Qutest is actually suited for gaming. I tried a Dragonfly Black once and found the delay between video and audio very distracting. And I wouldn't be surprised if the Qutest exhibits even mor lag due to the more complex filtering.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 27, 2019)

schnesim said:


> I'm wondering if the Qutest is actually suited for gaming. I tried a Dragonfly Black once and found the delay between video and audio very distracting. And I wouldn't be surprised if the Qutest exhibits even mor lag due to the more complex filtering.



Yes Qutest is fine for gaming, and there is no delay. I have used Mojo, Qutest, and Hugo 2 for gaming. Qutest rocks for gaming by the way. Gun sounds the whole deal all sound brilliant on the Qutest. The clarity does a lot for making outdoor scenes feel like you are in fresh air. Compared to my Meridian Explorer which sounded a bit muggy.


----------



## Reactcore

The delay isnt much. Have compared with my Questyle DAC (which has a AKM chip) and with direct AB test with a switch i dont notice it. I also watched movies with it with lipsync replay (on Jriver)


----------



## blueninjasix

I've followed the general consensus on here and switched over from usb to optical input on my Qutest. I bought a QED glass cable thinking I could take advantage of the 192KHz capabilities. I am shocked to discover that despite my computer being able to transmit a 192KHz file, Qutest's optical input maxes out at 96KHz. Even Dave has the same limitation but TT² can manage 192KHz that matches the cable. I'm disappointed.


----------



## Victorr

blueninjasix said:


> I've followed the general consensus on here and switched over from usb to optical input on my Qutest. I bought a QED glass cable thinking I could take advantage of the 192KHz capabilities. I am shocked to discover that despite my computer being able to transmit a 192KHz file, Qutest's optical input maxes out at 96KHz. Even Dave has the same limitation but TT² can manage 192KHz that matches the cable. I'm disappointed.


I had experience when a branded optical cable did not pass 176.4 and 192 kHz, and the Chinese noname worked without problems.


----------



## dinus777

blueninjasix said:


> I've followed the general consensus on here and switched over from usb to optical input on my Qutest. I bought a QED glass cable thinking I could take advantage of the 192KHz capabilities. I am shocked to discover that despite my computer being able to transmit a 192KHz file, Qutest's optical input maxes out at 96KHz. Even Dave has the same limitation but TT² can manage 192KHz that matches the cable. I'm disappointed.



I'm running Qutest optical connection 24bit 192Khz without a problem with sysconcept.ca cable and mac mini late 2014.

Chord Qutest manual also says that it is capable 24bit 192Khz or DSD64 via Optical.   Check you cable or pc/transport....


----------



## blueninjasix (Sep 27, 2019)

dinus777 said:


> I'm running Qutest optical connection 24bit 192Khz without a problem with sysconcept.ca cable and mac mini late 2014.
> 
> Chord Qutest manual also says that it is capable 24bit 192Khz or DSD64 via Optical.   Check you cable or pc/transport....


That's interesting. I didn't check the card that came with the unit, I checked online here on the features tab which states maximum input on the green optical input as 24/96 https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/qutest/
However, further down the page, there is an icon depicting optical input at 192KHz. I have contacted Chord to seek clarification.


----------



## GreenBow

blueninjasix said:


> I've followed the general consensus on here and switched over from usb to optical input on my Qutest. I bought a QED glass cable thinking I could take advantage of the 192KHz capabilities. I am shocked to discover that despite my computer being able to transmit a 192KHz file, Qutest's optical input maxes out at 96KHz. Even Dave has the same limitation but TT² can manage 192KHz that matches the cable. I'm disappointed.



As folk have said, it might be your cable. The same happened in the Mojo thread. Folk had to buy a  cable that could pass 192KHz.


----------



## blueninjasix (Sep 27, 2019)

GreenBow said:


> As folk have said, it might be your cable. The same happened in the Mojo thread. Folk had to buy a  cable that could pass 192KHz.


That was my initial thought too as the cable is QED Reference Optical Quartz which is specified at 192KHz. I have started a returns procedure with QED but they asked me to check with the manufacturers of the equipment at each end of their cable and it is Chord that is causing doubt due to the apparent contradiction of specs on their website.


----------



## MagnusH

I have an RME ADI-2 DAC and not a Qutest, but for me it was a cable issue. Bought a Lifatec glass cable and its rock solid at 192khz. (1.5 meter long), but naturally the sender has to support 192khz as well.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 27, 2019)

blueninjasix said:


> That was my initial thought too as the cable is QED Reference Optical Quartz which is specified at 192KHz. I have started a returns procedure with QED but they asked me to check with the manufacturers of the equipment at each end of their cable and it is Chord that is causing doubt due to the apparent contradiction of specs on their website.



Well, on the Mojo thread it was a case that some folk had cheap optical cables. All this happened ages ago - years. Then after buying a quality optical cable all was fixed.

However, I just checked my Qutest and a 192KHz file for you. I am playing Qutest now with an optical cable that I bought from Amazon for about £5. It's running 192KHz perfectly.

Another suggestion would be check your playback file source, and the software running music. Sometimes output an output channel is capped on the device.

I once could not understand why my music always played at 44.1KHz, and found a setting in my music player. Then another time I got a blue light (192KHz) on my DAC not matter what. It was a Windows setting that fixed that.

It seems your cable is good to go.


----------



## blueninjasix (Sep 27, 2019)

GreenBow said:


> Well, on the Mojo thread it was a case that some folk had cheap optical cables. All this happened ages ago - years. Then after buying a quality optical cable all was fixed.
> 
> However, I just checked my Qutest and a 192KHz file for you. I am playing Qutest now with an optical cable that I bought from Amazon for about £5. It's running 192KHz perfectly.
> 
> ...


I'm using the Topping D10 as a USB to optical interface and the topping is good to go at 192KHz per its website:


----------



## GreenBow

Sorry but I don't know that device. I would take it out of the chain until you can determine if the Qutest is performing right with your cable. I would go straight from file-source to Qutest via optical if your file source can do that. (Like if you are using a laptop with an optical output.)


----------



## GreenBow

Victorr said:


> I had experience when a branded optical cable did not pass 176.4 and 192 kHz, and the Chinese noname worked without problems.



Pretty sure I have heard that said on the rare occasion before. I was very surprised when I got my cheapo optical cable, that it ran 192KHz.


----------



## blueninjasix

GreenBow said:


> Sorry but I don't know that device. I would take it out of the chain until you can determine if the Qutest is performing right with your cable. I would go straight from file-source to Qutest via optical if your file source can do that. (Like if you are using a laptop with an optical output.)


I get the same result with my ASUS Xonar SE soundcard which also has 192KHz capability. 
I use Foobar 2000 Wasapi push which doesn't require me to specify a frequency I think?
I would be 100% convinced that the cable is faulty if I could be 100% sure of the Qutest's specs. My only doubt with Qutest is the apparent conflict on Chord's own website. I really appreciate your help in trying to resolve this issue for me.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 27, 2019)

I would definitely check Foobar settings. Like once I found that the default setting for JRiver set everything to 44.1KHz. I had to change that to 'no change' for files of different sampling frequencies.

I am telling you the truth that the Qutest plays 192KHz. However if you are still sceptical, then you will have to wait for other people to confirm it for you.

I have taken a photo of Qutest playing 192KHz with the blue sampling frequency light. However my camera is old and not brilliant. (I know, I need a new one. Just choosing does my head in.) You can still just see the sampling frequency light is blue though. Photo taken in low light, otherwise flash would kill the blue light. Plus the input is green for optical, (as well as the voltage output at 2V green).



You should tell Chord about the wrong information on the website. I am sure they would assure you of the specs of the Qutest. Also they would be grateful for your notifying them of the wrong data on their website.

It's also obvious that the Qutest does 192KHz on optical, because it has the same DAC parts as the Hugo 2.



I don't know why, but it's very difficult to capture the blue light with my old camera. This photo shows the blue light reflected in the port glass.


----------



## blueninjasix

GreenBow said:


> I would definitely check Foobar settings. Like once I found that the default setting for JRiver set everything to 44.1KHz. I had to change that to 'no change' for files of different sampling frequencies.
> 
> I am telling you the truth that the Qutest plays 192KHz, However if you are still sceptical, then you will have to wait for other people to confirm it for you.
> 
> ...


Thanks for this information.


----------



## GreenBow

Information!?


----------



## nwavesailor (Sep 28, 2019)

I may be looking for a solution to a problem that I may not have. I am scheduled to receive my Qutest, Monday.

I have done a search on this forum and didn't see any posts about the iFi iPower 5 volt DC PS as a good $50 option. John Darko mentioned it in his Qutest review.


----------



## dac64

nwavesailor said:


> I may be looking for a solution to a problem that I may not have. I am scheduled to receive my Qutest, Monday.
> 
> I have done a search on this forum and didn't see any posts about the iFi iPower 5 volt DC PS as a good $50 option. John Darko mentioned it in his Qutest review.



I have compared the stock with poweradd 2 power bank, no different to me.

Till now,almost a year, still using the stock.

Maybe I will try 485w power banks for both the Qutest and HMS one of these days.


----------



## Reactcore

Most players like foobar state the samplerate theyre outputting in properties
Did you checked this first?


----------



## blueninjasix

Reactcore said:


> Most players like foobar state the samplerate theyre outputting in properties
> Did you checked this first?


Yes Foobar is showing 192KHz in the bottom left corner and this is confirmed by the same rate showing on the screen of the Topping D10. Foobar doesn't throw up an error message, it just plays the track silently. I'm getting more convinced that it is a fault with the QED cable.


----------



## Reactcore

I had the same with optical out of my AK120 DAP, only the 3rd cable i tried worked up till 192khz. After research i found that the best optical cables are the multistranded ones. It has to do with light reflections.
The smaller the diameter, the less timing differences occur at the cable end. Each strand is much thinner than a one solid cable, but theyre pricey.
I have settled with a 0.75m Audioquest Forest for€25.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 28, 2019)

Reactcore said:


> I had the same with optical out of my AK120 DAP, only the 3rd cable i tried worked up till 192khz. After research i found that the best optical cables are the multistranded ones. It has to do with light reflections.
> The smaller the diameter, the less timing differences occur at the cable end. Each strand is much thinner than a one solid cable, but theyre pricey.
> I have settled with a 0.75m Audioquest Forest for€25.



That's interesting. I read an article in HiFi Choice about digital cable quality. Reflections in optical cables was mentioned.

It's odd though that I have a £5 cable that works fine with 192KHz. I tried to find out where I bought it. It was either Amazon or Ebay but I can't find a purchase on either. I am thinking it was Ebay and my Ebay purchase history doesn't go back more than two years.


----------



## Reactcore

Reflections are random, also the polish accuracy of the connector surface plays a role. Im just saying that 192khz is the edge of capabillity for a single strand cable. I guess your Qutest could be processing lost/double bit errors that you won't hear easily but just dont drop out.


----------



## blueninjasix

Reactcore said:


> I had the same with optical out of my AK120 DAP, only the 3rd cable i tried worked up till 192khz. After research i found that the best optical cables are the multistranded ones. It has to do with light reflections.
> The smaller the diameter, the less timing differences occur at the cable end. Each strand is much thinner than a one solid cable, but theyre pricey.
> I have settled with a 0.75m Audioquest Forest for€25.


Mine is QED Reference Optical Quartz at £88 for 1 metre and like you suggest and I'm quoting here from QED's website:- it is made  consisting of 210 separate boro-silicate glass fibres each finer than a human hair. It has a much higher bandwidth and only 1/10th of the attenuation of traditional acrylic fibres. Reference Optical Quartz vastly exceeds the demands for high definition multi-channel digital audio with a bandwidth of over 150MHz which is totally unaffected by bending the cable.


----------



## nick77

> I have done a search on this forum and didn't see any posts about the iFi iPower 5 volt DC PS as a good $50 option. John Darko mentioned it in his Qutest review.


I dont think there is any free lunch with regards to an external PS, I doubt a $50 supply will be noticeable.


----------



## Reactcore

Hm have you peeked into the optical hole of Qutest and your source.. maybe theres dust / moisture in it. That would be devastating.


----------



## Reactcore

And on foobar you use wasapi?
Windows mixer can downsample f2k's 192khz output..


----------



## HumanMedia (Sep 28, 2019)

nwavesailor said:


> I may be looking for a solution to a problem that I may not have. I am scheduled to receive my Qutest, Monday.
> 
> I have done a search on this forum and didn't see any posts about the iFi iPower 5 volt DC PS as a good $50 option. John Darko mentioned it in his Qutest review.



As an owner of the iFi power supply, they are garbage. The DC output is filtered but they have excessive leakage current. Might even sound worse than the stock supply. Qutest does perform better with a good supply, but good will cost you many hundreds of dollars. But expensive doesn’t mean better either. You will need to audition many supplies before you find one that is clearly better.


----------



## kerisabe (Sep 28, 2019)

HumanMedia said:


> As an owner of the iFi power supply, they are garbage. The DC output is filtered but they have excessive leakage current. Might even sound worse than the stock supply. Qutest does perform better with a good supply, but good will cost you many hundreds of dollars. But expensive doesn’t mean better either. You will need to audition many supplies before you find one that is clearly better.



I’m also running an IFI ipower with my qutest, and i am definitely sure it is not garbage. I am separating the ipower from the rest of the component in the power strip using an ac ipurifier (plugging the ipower at the end of the power strip, with the ac ipurifier in front if it). Definite improvement compared to the stock smps, more separation, more air. Will there be more/bigger improvement using better/more expensive psu in the market? Yes. Is it worth it?


----------



## blueninjasix

OK I've had a reply from Chord Electronics
"
Dear Sir, thanks for your inquiry.
With all our products, the maximium sample rate via optical is 24/96 as this is all the connection is ratified for. The other connections can handle 192kHz and greater though. 
All the best"
Despite the evidence that 192kHz is being supported by other users of Head-Fi and contrary to the Qutest manual and to Chord's own website.


----------



## miketlse

I suspect that there could be confusion about the different meanings of 'ratified for' and 'technically capable of', so I have raised the question with Chord for you?


----------



## Reactcore (Sep 29, 2019)

192/24 via optical plays nicely, blue light confirms this.


----------



## 474194

schnesim said:


> I'm wondering if the Qutest is actually suited for gaming. I tried a Dragonfly Black once and found the delay between video and audio very distracting. And I wouldn't be surprised if the Qutest exhibits even mor lag due to the more complex filtering.



I believe it should be fine as long as you install the Chord native Windows driver.  I don't remember any lag with the Mojo.  If there were audio/video sync issues, it would be brought on this thread as Youtube is mission-critical.

I took a quick look at the AudioQuest site, did you set your Dragonfly to 'exclusive mode'?  

https://www.audioquest.com/page/aq-digitalupdates.html

I didn't see any native Windows driver download for Dragonfly.


----------



## Jacques Lolive

Hello I will buy a Chord Qutest in France with a voltage of 230v and I would like to use it then in Brazil with a voltage of 110 v. Do you know if the Qutest power supply is suitable for both voltages? If not, where can I buy a power supply for 110v?  
Thank's a lot for the answer


----------



## kerisabe

Jacques Lolive said:


> Hello I will buy a Chord Qutest in France with a voltage of 230v and I would like to use it then in Brazil with a voltage of 110 v. Do you know if the Qutest power supply is suitable for both voltages? If not, where can I buy a power supply for 110v?
> Thank's a lot for the answer



The supply that comes with the qutest will work, it also comes with plug adaptors.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 30, 2019)

blueninjasix said:


> OK I've had a reply from Chord Electronics
> "
> Dear Sir, thanks for your inquiry.
> With all our products, the maximium sample rate via optical is 24/96 as this is all the connection is ratified for. The other connections can handle 192kHz and greater though.
> ...



Since your reply said all Chord products, I went looking over the website:

Their website actually says up to 24bit 96KHz for Hugo 2. However I have never had any problem running 192KHz on my Hugo 2.
Website says 24bit 192KHz for the Mojo.
While the website says nothing on the TT2, but the manual says 192KHz on the optical input. (Manual for the previous version TT states 192KHz on optical too.)

This is all very confusing. I was solidly under the impression that the Hugo 2 and TT2 run 192KHz optical. I was under the impression that all Chord DACs run 192KHz on the optical.

I buy Chord DACS being under the impression they ran 192KHz on optical. I buy 192KHz music when I can, so I would want DACs to run that as the minimum. That's how I thought it was and never gave it a second thought.


(I don't mean to cause trouble. However the website saying a product runs up to 96KHz, and the manual saying 192KHz. That has to be illegal; it's got to be a mistake though. Someone should advise them to get that straight before it causes trouble. Although I doubt it will.

 Not that I am going to say anything because my DACS all run blue, so I am assuming they are running at 192KHz when I use optical. I almost always use USB though. Me showing the Qutest running optical was time consuming. Getting the cable, plugging it in, finding 192KHz music, swapping settings over on my PC (a few times), photographing, transferring photos to PC. Writing long post.)





Reactcore said:


> 192/24 via optical plays nicely, blue light confirms this.



Nice to see. I was hoping someone else would confirm Qutest playing 192KHz. Since Chord are saying the Qutest runs at 96KHz, folk might have thought I was pulling a trick. What with me having posted blue on my optical input showing Qutest running 192KHz.

Your camera has done the same as mine. Shows most of the blue light as white, with just a bit of blue around it. Nice that your DAP is showing the file type information.





AC-12 said:


> I believe it should be fine as long as you install the Chord native Windows driver.  I don't remember any lag with the Mojo.  If there were audio/video sync issues, it would be brought on this thread as Youtube is mission-critical.
> 
> I took a quick look at the AudioQuest site, did you set your Dragonfly to 'exclusive mode'?
> 
> ...



The driver does not play any part in any connection other than USB. Apparent Mac computers don't need any driver at all.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 29, 2019)

Reactcore said:


> Reflections are random, also the polish accuracy of the connector surface plays a role. Im just saying that 192khz is the edge of capabillity for a single strand cable. I guess your Qutest could be processing lost/double bit errors that you won't hear easily but just dont drop out.



I believed you. I believed about reflections in cables. I wondered by your reply if you thought I didn't, because I said my cheap cable worked at 192KHz.

When I bought that cable it was not meant for anything fancy, and I didn't own any 192KHz music. I had a set of Q Acoustics BT3, which I fed by Mojo through RCA inputs. However the BT3 have a DAC in them. I bought the optical cable just to have a listen to the BT3 DAC. I never got to hear it before then, as I had no other way to connect digitally to the BT3.

I think it was just lucky that the cheap cable worked at 192KHz. Although like someone else said, cheap cables do sometimes. I would prefer a quality cable though if I was going to run high res music over optical all the time. I always use USB though for convenience.


----------



## Jacques Lolive

kerisabe said:


> The supply that comes with the qutest will work, it also comes with plug adaptors.


Thank's for the reply. So th supply work with both voltage. It's a good new !


----------



## blueninjasix

GreenBow said:


> Since your reply said all Chord products, I went looking over the website:
> 
> Their website actually says up to 24bit 96KHz for Hugo 2. However I have never had any problem running 192KHz on my Hugo 2.
> Website says 24bit 192KHz for the Mojo.
> ...


Thanks for this long and detailed reply. I'm glad that I'm not the only one who is confused. I do need clarification from Chord because when I have tried to return a (possibly) faulty optical cable to QED, the first question they ask is if I'm sure that the equipment at either end is capable of 192kHz and unfortunately, at the moment, I cannot give them an answer about my Qutest.


----------



## Victorr

blueninjasix said:


> Thanks for this long and detailed reply. I'm glad that I'm not the only one who is confused. I do need clarification from Chord because when I have tried to return a (possibly) faulty optical cable to QED, the first question they ask is if I'm sure that the equipment at either end is capable of 192kHz and unfortunately, at the moment, I cannot give them an answer about my Qutest.


Manufacturers often specify a parameter for the optical connection 24-96, so as not to engage in controversy with cable manufacturers. I have long had a similar problem (as I wrote above) with another DAC. I decided to just use a cheap cable and forgot about expensive branded cables. I advise you to do the same.


----------



## Rob Watts

The Qutest is indeed capable of running at 192 kHz, so long as the source and the fibre is capable of doing this; in the past, Toshiba made the rx. and tx., and even with crappy plastic 192 would work well. But Toshiba have stopped making these devices; the current alternatives, although rated at 192 kHz, are not as good as before; so many manufacturers are no longer claiming that optical will work at 192 kHz. Indeed, AP test equipment no longer claim that 192 kHz works on optical.

So Qutest will work at 192, but only if the partnering gear is up to the task...


----------



## GreenBow

That sounds like the definitive answer to me.


----------



## miketlse

GreenBow said:


> That sounds like the definitive answer to me.


Matt replied to me and clarified the situation as well.

"All our DACs are capable of 24/192KHz over optical. However the spec and design of spdif optical means at this rate it is right on the edge of working. This means you need to keep the optical cable as short as possible, use glass fibre if possible and then the fibre in the plugs has to be perfectly aligned so that there is no mismatch when plugged into the receiver in the DAC. So there are lots of factors that can cause optical to fail at 24/192KHz.
Added to this around 2 years ago Sony in particular (but also the optical component manufacturers) announced that they would stop support of 24/192KHz via optical and there was a recommendation that the spec was reduced to 24/96KHz for all consumer products to help reduce the confusion and the number of customer support cases.
This means that for us we had no guarantee that the source would actually work correctly at 24/192KHz, whether the optical cable was capable of passing the signal up to 24/192KHz, and then finally on top of that any cable mismatch issue would also cause problems.

So we have decided to simplify things and start to change the spec of all our products to only guarantee operation at 24/96KHz to avoid any confusion or upset when higher rates do not work correctly. So yes there is a difference between ratified which means we can guarantee operation, and technically capable of where it can do it if the correct conditions are met."


----------



## blueninjasix

miketlse said:


> Matt replied to me and clarified the situation as well.
> 
> "All our DACs are capable of 24/192KHz over optical. However the spec and design of spdif optical means at this rate it is right on the edge of working. This means you need to keep the optical cable as short as possible, use glass fibre if possible and then the fibre in the plugs has to be perfectly aligned so that there is no mismatch when plugged into the receiver in the DAC. So there are lots of factors that can cause optical to fail at 24/192KHz.
> Added to this around 2 years ago Sony in particular (but also the optical component manufacturers) announced that they would stop support of 24/192KHz via optical and there was a recommendation that the spec was reduced to 24/96KHz for all consumer products to help reduce the confusion and the number of customer support cases.
> ...


Thank you and to all others in this thread who have helped to clarify this matter. I also received confirmation from Ed at Chord along similar lines. As ever I am extremely impressed with the access we have to Rob Watts, to Chord Electronics and their excellent customer service.


----------



## kumar402

blueninjasix said:


> OK I've had a reply from Chord Electronics
> "
> Dear Sir, thanks for your inquiry.
> With all our products, the maximium sample rate via optical is 24/96 as this is all the connection is ratified for. The other connections can handle 192kHz and greater though.
> ...


Well I definitely streamed 24/192 from Qobuz with Amazon basics optical cable from my MacBook pro2013


----------



## dac64 (Sep 30, 2019)

dac64 said:


> I have compared the stock with poweradd 2 power bank, no different to me.
> 
> Till now,almost a year, still using the stock.
> 
> Maybe I will try 485w power banks for both the Qutest and HMS one of these days.



I have battery powered the HMS and Qutest, and I didn't like the sound.

It sounded unnatural, maybe these china-made generated huge distortions.

On the contrary, playing with the resonoses of the equipment bringing biggest impacts to the sounds!

The changes to the sound were more prominent after the addition of the HMS!


----------



## nwavesailor

Just got my Qutest today and it is quite impressive! I am using it with a HeadAmp GS-X Mini and Cavalli Liquid Platinum and primarily Empy hp as well as some E2.

Is the OEM USB cable a USB A to USB B? Anything special I should be looking for in a shorter version of this cable?


----------



## Gibson59 (Oct 1, 2019)

Not that anyone needs to spend this much on an optical cable, but I can confirm that I’ve been successfully using an Audioquest Carbon optical cable to stream 24/192 via Qobuz/Roon from my Mac Mini for some time now without any issues. Sounds fantastic!


----------



## jbarrentine

Gibson59 said:


> Not that anyone needs to spend this much on an optical cable, but I can confirm that I’ve been successfully using an Audioquest Carbon optical cable to stream 24/192 via Qobuz/Roon from my Mac Mini for some time now without any issues. Sounds fantastic!



Yeesh. For that price you can get a Lifatek glass.


----------



## Gibson59

jbarrentine said:


> Yeesh. For that price you can get a Lifatek glass.



Wasn’t aware of Lifatek back when I bought the AQ Carbon. No regrets as the Carbon sounds great. If I needed another optical cable I’d definitely give Lifatek a took.


----------



## nwavesailor

Could any Supra USB 2.0 A to B owners comment regarding  the flexibility (or stiffness) of this Supra USB in 1 meter length?

Thanks!


----------



## Triode User

nwavesailor said:


> Could any Supra USB 2.0 A to B owners comment regarding  the flexibility (or stiffness) of this Supra USB in 1 meter length?
> 
> Thanks!



I would say it is pretty flexible. Not perhaps what I would call supple but still quite flexible. It is my USB cable of choice.


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Oct 2, 2019)

nwavesailor said:


> Could any Supra USB 2.0 A to B owners comment regarding  the flexibility (or stiffness) of this Supra USB in 1 meter length?
> 
> Thanks!



I think you can trust Triode user’s recommendation. I would also recommend it as it won a Hi-fi Choice shoot out a few years ago (and it sounds great in my view), with a comment that it sounded darker than the other cables, probably/ possibly due to better emi or rfi suppression. In any case to your question I don’t think it is super flexible but flexible enough to bend somewhat for my Hugo 2 without putting strain on the input or lifting it, so should be fine with the Qutest as that is heavier  (and larger footprint) I would think. Hope that helps,


----------



## Reactcore

Who else is playing direct out of Qutest?
Ive been playing through my 32ohm tomahawk earbuds. Have set Qutest level to 1v to be safe and have a smoother volume regulation. On foobar remote control im ok under 20.
A RCA to female 1/4 jack is cheap to get.
HP users should really try this. 
No groundloops to amp possible.


----------



## betula

Reactcore said:


> Who else is playing direct out of Qutest?
> Ive been playing through my 32ohm tomahawk earbuds. Have set Qutest level to 1v to be safe and have a smoother volume regulation. On foobar remote control im ok under 20.
> A RCA to female 1/4 jack is cheap to get.
> HP users should really try this.
> No groundloops to amp possible.


I would have loved to try this when I had my Qutest even though it looks a bit quirky. 
Anyone can compare this direct use of Qutest to Hugo2?


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 2, 2019)

You basically get a Hugo2 dac with Mojo's op stage.(as to read at start of this thread)
I have been thinking of terminating a HD800 cable with RCA's, minimizing used couplings. Might order another set of HP side plugs..
One of the strenghts of eg a TT is no need for external amp and therefore no losses. Well Qutest has one inside also ..sadly with only 3 step volume which cant be live adjusted.
I only miss a smooth feeling rotating volume knob. But foobar works nice linear with enough steps.


----------



## nwavesailor

Thanks  to both @Paul Bjernklo and @Triode User for the cable flex answer! 

I will be using the Supra USB cable, routed to the front of the Qutest, with the newest 7th Gen version iPod Touch.


----------



## RKClem

I've had the Qutest for 3 weeks now and loving the step up from my Firestone Spitfire DAC.  I have been using the supplied power supply as I saw many posts referencing Rob Watts' comments on the subject.  I have an old Welborne labs DIY LPS lying around that I had used for my Allo Digione Signature, so I thought I would give it a try.  I didn't expect much if any change. However to me the difference was big.  I don't want to contradict Rob Watts (because I think he is a genius) but to me with the LPS the sound stage was much deeper the vocals and instruments were more focused and realistic sounding. Am I just fooling myself? Who knows? I wanted to prefer the stock PS but to me The LPS was an improvement.  I trust Rob's ears more than mine so I'm a bit confused.


----------



## Reactcore

Just done reading through this whole thread. Sometimes i wished Qutest had a built in psu.. it would have cut the # of posts immensely. and i do like the 5v microB for mobile purposes.


----------



## Baten

Reactcore said:


> Who else is playing direct out of Qutest?
> Ive been playing through my 32ohm tomahawk earbuds. Have set Qutest level to 1v to be safe and have a smoother volume regulation. On foobar remote control im ok under 20.
> A RCA to female 1/4 jack is cheap to get.
> HP users should really try this.
> No groundloops to amp possible.


What is that RCA to female 1/4 jack? Looks nice.


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 3, 2019)

I made that myself just to try. But im going to make a better Q. one since it turned to sound so good. 

My analog input modded CMA400i current mode amp will get a lot less running hours although i do also use its digital coax out. The internal Xmos USB receiver does a fine job too.

For the ones interested in this mod see here:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/adding-an-analog-input-to-an-dac-amp-which-doesnt-have-one.912647/


----------



## RKClem

Reactcore said:


> Sometimes i wished Qutest had a built in psu.. it would have cut the # of posts immensely.



I know what you mean.  Have you tried different power options?


----------



## Reactcore

Course i have.. used lipo batteries with a non switching 2A regulator (L78S05) to make 5v absolutely jitter and mains noise free.
I took the extra heat loss for granted for the sake of cleanest juice.
But concluded stock psu is just the same sounding. So i havent bothered posting bout it.. till u asked.

Btw Welcome to club Headfi


----------



## RKClem

Reactcore said:


> Btw Welcome to club Headfi



Thanks for the welcome   This can be an intimidating place.  I am here to learn and not suggest I know more than others (I don't).  I imagine every environment is different regarding electrical noise.  I don't have a power conditioner, maybe that's relevant in my case??  I'm also trying to train my ears to hear positive differences in SQ.  Trust me I am not posting just for the sake of it.


----------



## 474194

For Supra products, another channel one can order from is Madisound.

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/supra-cables/


----------



## nwavesailor

I did see Madisound as a Supra dealer. 
The US distributor for Supra, SJOFN HiFi, is located in Seattle (Madisound is in WI)  so a shorter shipping time to me!


----------



## RKClem

RKClem said:


> I don't want to contradict Rob Watts (because I think he is a genius) but to me with the LPS the sound stage was much deeper the vocals and instruments were more focused and realistic sounding. Am I just fooling myself?



After more dedicated listening I think I was fooling myself. I now think I mistook the changes for SQ improvements. After switching back to the stock ps the music is more enjoyable and natural. I have completely contradicted my earlier comment. Still learning after all these years!


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 5, 2019)

Just as i reasoned. Chord would never work so much creating such superb DAC and undo some of its quality with a wrong chosen psu, which is normally plugged in somewhere out of sight.

The vast majority of users just use the things out of the box getting the sound Chord intented.

I have great respect for Rob, John and the rest of his team for alowing us to reach this level of blissfull sound.. 
with our old record collection.


----------



## nwavesailor

After 1 week with the Qutest I still find this interesting looking 'new shiny object' absolutely stunning!

I _thought_ I had pretty nice sound using my Meze Empy hp and wondered if a Qutest DAC could really add a greater level of detail and clarity..........in a word, YES!
Thanks again to @Triode User and @Paul Bjernklo for helping with my decision to try the Supra USB 2.0 cable. After day 1 it _seems_ like it might be a bit less harsh than the OEM USB cable but without sacrificing the fantastic Qutest detail.


----------



## Triode User

nwavesailor said:


> After 1 week with the Qutest I still find this interesting looking 'new shiny object' absolutely stunning!
> 
> I _thought_ I had pretty nice sound using my Meze Empy hp and wondered if a Qutest DAC could really add a greater level of detail and clarity..........in a word, YES!
> Thanks again to @Triode User and @Paul Bjernklo for helping with my decision to try the Supra USB 2.0 cable. After day 1 it _seems_ like it might be a bit less harsh than the OEM USB cable but without sacrificing the fantastic Qutest detail.



I'm glad you are enjoying the Supra cable. I selected it because I found no difference to a £1600 USB cable from a well thought of and well known cable company


----------



## Reactcore

Hm going to give this Meze Empy a try.
I heard the classic but wasnt a fan of it.
How do they compare..


----------



## betula

Reactcore said:


> Hm going to give this Meze Empy a try.
> I heard the classic but wasnt a fan of it.
> How do they compare..


I wasn't a fan of the classic either but I absolutely love the Empy. I found the Classic's midbass bloated while the sub rolled off. It was pretty warm and not too detailed. Although I like bass and a smooth sound the classic was too much. 
The Empy is in a whole other universe. The best headphones I tried up to date for my taste and I tried quite a lot. They do like a clean source like Qutest and good SS amp. Try to audition a pair. The highest level of technicalities (resolution, detail, imaging) and a musical, addictive sound in one package. No other flagship I have heard offer this level of both worlds.


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 5, 2019)

Based on you guys experience here ive just ordered a Supra usb. For €35 i cant go wrong. Will get it next week. I did choose the shortest one which is 0.7m ive seen. Less cable length means less quality loss.


----------



## dinus777

RKClem said:


> After more dedicated listening I think I was fooling myself. I now think I mistook the changes for SQ improvements. After switching back to the stock ps the music is more enjoyable and natural. I have completely contradicted my earlier comment. Still learning after all these years!



yes , exactly my experience. I tried Anker Battery operation, and Sbooster LSPU. First of all, it looked like improvement in SQ, but after some more listeting, Chord Qutest stock PSU sounded best. So i trust Chord team , and using stock PSU. There are a lot of Rob Watts comments what we can mistaken for SQ improvement....


----------



## Reactcore

betula said:


> I wasn't a fan of the classic either but I absolutely love the Empy. I found the Classic's midbass bloated while the sub rolled off. It was pretty warm and not too detailed. Although I like bass and a smooth sound the classic was too much.
> The Empy is in a whole other universe. The best headphones I tried up to date for my taste and I tried quite a lot. They do like a clean source like Qutest and good SS amp. Try to audition a pair. The highest level of technicalities (resolution, detail, imaging) and a musical, addictive sound in one package. No other flagship I have heard offer this level of both worlds.



Thanks B
I know you used this with Questyle amp.
Did u happen to compare this also with a HD800? Im a soundstage head


----------



## betula

Reactcore said:


> Thanks B
> I know you used this with Questyle amp.
> Did u happen to compare this also with a HD800? Im a soundstage head


HD800 has bigger soundstage but the sound to me is thinner and brighter with leaner bass. Empy is still clear but with a meatier low end. Imaging on Empy is very accurate. Soundstage on HD800 is wider and taller but on Empy it is deeper.


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 5, 2019)

After i did a SD mod and replaced the cushions with thicker leather ones, the low end on the senns got more pronounced.
And no bright 6khz peak.

I wonder when the next senn dynamic open back flagship comes out. The HD800 dates from 2009 > 10yrs. The HD820 is closed and brings less of the fine details out of Qutest imo.


----------



## nwavesailor

The Supra USB 2.0 cable is well made and sounds very good...............but being an audio _KOOK_.............I ordered an inexpensive Furutech Formula 2 USB 2.0 today to compare and see if one is more flexible than the other assuming they both sound good. 
Both of these USB cables received WHAT HiFi awards and are in the $50 range so I'm not too far down the USB rabbit hole!


----------



## HumanMedia (Oct 6, 2019)

nwavesailor said:


> The Supra USB 2.0 cable is well made and sounds very good...............but being an audio _KOOK_.............I ordered an inexpensive Furutech Formula 2 USB 2.0 today to compare and see if one is more flexible than the other assuming they both sound good.
> Both of these USB cables received WHAT HiFi awards and are in the $50 range so I'm not too far down the USB rabbit hole!



Give the Oyaide d+ USB class A cable a go. It has particular Synergy with the Qutest. Great bass with high and wide soundstage,


----------



## nwavesailor (Oct 6, 2019)

HumanMedia said:


> Give the Oyaide d+ USB class A cable a go. It has particular Synergy with the Qutest. Great bass with high and wide soundstage,



This Oyaide USB cable gets great reviews and all of their products are very well made.  Their 'flat' cable may not work for my application. I need a flexible cable as I am using a new handheld 7th gen iPod Touch routed to the back of the Qutest's USB 'B' input. It is, however, right there in the $50 +/-  ballpark with the Supra and Furutech USB 2.0 cables.


----------



## Armando Cruz

Hi there qutest lovers! I just bought the exquisite Chord qutest dac ( Super happy with it !) . I have  a sotm sms ultra neo as streamer and I'm looking for an upgrade... Will the uptone iso regen be an worth it upgrade?   Or should I spent a fortune( at least to me ) and buy the Sotm TX usb?

Happy listening too you all


----------



## Arniesb

Armando Cruz said:


> Hi there qutest lovers! I just bought the exquisite Chord qutest dac ( Super happy with it !) . I have  a sotm sms ultra neo as streamer and I'm looking for an upgrade... Will the uptone iso regen be an worth it upgrade?   Or should I spent a fortune( at least to me ) and buy the Sotm TX usb?
> 
> Happy listening too you all


If you buy iso regen you gonna feel the difference and then you want to upgrade to sotm anyway. Keep in mind that no matter how good dac is. Source still matter.
Clocks as more precise it gets the more realistic and resolving sound gets and Sotm super clock is head and shoulders above anything else on the market. 0 comparison against poor clocks on pcs motherboards that is further gets weaker in performance when it is affected by noise inside computers.


----------



## Armando Cruz

Gotcha ,  Audiobacon describe the TX as lean . Do you see it in the same way?  Will I have low end improvement on the sms 200 ultra with the TX?

Thank you Arniesb


----------



## Armando Cruz

" iso regen you gonna feel the difference and then you want to upgrade to sotm anyway" . I have read everywhere the other way around. My impression is, that   everybody gets the Tx (clarity,definition)  and then everybody  wants to add the ISO after , to get some  warm sound  ( want more body in it). At least it's my impression... And I'm thinking  - if I can get a bit more definition with the ISO and get straight way more body in it. Why will I buy the TX? On which lacks body?


----------



## Arniesb

Armando Cruz said:


> Gotcha ,  Audiobacon describe the TX as lean . Do you see it in the same way?  Will I have low end improvement on the sms 200 ultra with the TX?
> 
> Thank you Arniesb


Not true.
It wont make warm headphones or speakers with powerful sub "bright".
It will highlight flaws of your system. Lot of headphones have lot of highs, dip in mids and not enough bass. All of this can contribute to thin sound.
Add revealing sotm and then you gonna hear even thinner sound.
If headphone sound full then whole system gonna sound even fuller with sotm.
Extension is always gonna be better with good reclocker like sotm.


----------



## Armando Cruz (Oct 7, 2019)

I get what you mean Arnie,  very  enlightened indeed!     It's for speakers ( at home I do prefer more to listen my stereo system )  , I forget that I'm in headphone forum. I do have headphones , actually it's the only decent headphones I ever had (never heard any others)  , it's the beyerdynamics 1990 pro ( which I love it, and I don't feel the need to look any further, they are very neutral)  I use it with chord mojo.

Thank you very much Arniesb. I will buy the Sotm tx


----------



## Reactcore

Its here..
Now lets hear if it really is that good..


----------



## betula

Anyone has compared this magical Supra cable to Wireworld Ultraviolet 7?


----------



## kerisabe

Guys,

from your experience, now with a qutest, would it be better to upgrade to TT2 or just adding an M scaler to qutest? Hope to hear your inputs, thanks!


----------



## Gibson59

kerisabe said:


> Guys,
> 
> from your experience, now with a qutest, would it be better to upgrade to TT2 or just adding an M scaler to qutest? Hope to hear your inputs, thanks!



i’ve had a chance to hear both, and to me the qutest with M scaler bested the TT2 on its own. However, I would say part of your decision depends on your amp needs. If you already own a great amp that’s one thing, but if you don’t own an amp already then maybe the TT2 make sense and would come at a lower overall cost. Not like the TT2 lacks for much. I tend to like switching gear up and trying out different amps, so for me the amp section of the TT2 would be a bit of a waste.


----------



## betula

Gibson59 said:


> i’ve had a chance to hear both, and to me the qutest with M scaler bested the TT2 on its own. However, I would say part of your decision depends on your amp needs. If you already own a great amp that’s one thing, but if you don’t own an amp already then maybe the TT2 make sense and would come at a lower overall cost. Not like the TT2 lacks for much. I tend to like switching gear up and trying out different amps, so for me the amp section of the TT2 would be a bit of a waste.


It depends on your budget I guess.
You must pair Qutest with an amp and add MScaler. That's more links in the chain. Chord's philosophy is about minimising the number of links. TT2 definitely gives a more transparent experience to any amps paired with Qutest. Not to mention the double amount of taps.

The thing is, if you buy MScaler with your Qutest you would want to get the TT2 sooner or later anyway. I would say go for the TT2 and get the MScaler when you can.
My TT2 absolutely slaughters any amps paired with my previous Qutest.


----------



## Reactcore

If u already have Qutest for HP use, i say try driving direct out. youll hear what happends shortening the chain.


----------



## Gibson59

betula said:


> It depends on your budget I guess.
> You must pair Qutest with an amp and add MScaler. That's more links in the chain. Chord's philosophy is about minimising the number of links. TT2 definitely gives a more transparent experience to any amps paired with Qutest. Not to mention the double amount of taps.
> 
> The thing is, if you buy MScaler with your Qutest you would want to get the TT2 sooner or later anyway. I would say go for the TT2 and get the MScaler when you can.
> My TT2 absolutely slaughters any amps paired with my previous Qutest.



we agree to disagree 

With all due respect to Chord, while appreciate their philosophy about minimizing the number of links, that doesn’t drive my decision... my ears do. I have a feeling plenty of people (including myself) would be more than content with Qutest + mscaler + high-end amp and not “have to” upgrade to TT2 unless they absolutely couldn’t shake their GAS. Especially if one already own an amp(s) they really like (and if they like tubes).


----------



## betula

Gibson59 said:


> we agree to disagree
> 
> With all due respect to Chord, while appreciate their philosophy about minimizing the number of links, that doesn’t drive my decision... my ears do. I have a feeling plenty of people (including myself) would be more than content with Qutest + mscaler + high-end amp and not “have to” upgrade to TT2 unless they absolutely couldn’t shake their GAS. Especially if one already own an amp(s) they really like (and if they like tubes).


Sure, both upgrade routes are equally valid. To me the biggest question is what amp you put between Qutest and MScaler?


----------



## BlakeT (Oct 9, 2019)

Sound quality preferences will vary greatly from user to user, but in terms of the upgrade question being discussed above, I think Torq's comments in this thread should be given a decent amount of weight (although he unfortunately doesn't specifically discuss the Qutest, but does discuss the TT2 and M-Scaler, etc.), as Torq has more experience with DAC's at all ends of the spectrum (affordable to cost-no-object TOTL), and Chord DAC's, M-Scaler, etc. in particular, than anyone else of which I am aware:

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/57357-chord-hugo-2-upgrade-m-scaler-or-tt2/

I'm not sure if it is a consensus, but my impression from reading various reviews is that Qutest is generally considered to be sonically superior to the Hugo 2, so you could extrapolate Torq's comments vis a vis the Hugo 2 to the Qutest.  I am very happy with my Qutest but would love to try the M-Scaler with it one day.


----------



## kerisabe

Guys much appreciated the inputs! Currently im running the qutest through the gryphon diablo 300, lovin the sound. I am thinking of selling the qutest to move up to TT2, or diablo 300’s optional internal dac (less cables, direct to amp), a mid level lampi or bartok. I havent heard all of the above except the bartok (but not in my system). Just dont want to take a step in the wrong direction cause its quite a big upgrade. And to me, the shorter the chain, the better the sq (no additional mods/cables). Decisions decisions. In the end, the idea of just adding an m scaler keeps coming back to my mind.


----------



## Reactcore

So i have done some voltage measuring on the power section inside Qutest.
It appears the 5v is switched up to + and - 12v and then regulated to + an - 8v referred to signal ground before feeded into the final OP stage. 

I wonder if placing gold caps over these 8v lines give improvement for direct drive cause more current (peaks) are drawn by HP.

I know with external amps this wouldnt matter cause of the input being 50kohm or so taking very low current.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Reactcore said:


> So i have done some voltage measuring on the power section inside Qutest.
> It appears the 5v is switched up to + and - 12v and then regulated to + an - 8v referred to signal ground before feeded into the final OP stage.
> 
> I wonder if placing gold caps over these 8v lines give improvement for direct drive cause more current (peaks) are drawn by HP.
> ...


Interesting find!

But wouldn't it be better if they used +- 12V from the start?

I'd like to know the result of the added reservoir caps.


----------



## Reactcore

Im a little hesitant with this, it might damage the regulator during powerup cycles.
Guess Rob wouldnt answer this since it would be tampering with the original design.


----------



## Triode User

Reactcore said:


> Im a little hesitant with this, it might damage the regulator during powerup cycles.
> Guess Rob wouldnt answer this since it would be tampering with the original design.



But it would be fun for us to see the pictures especially if there was some magic smoke coming from the Qutest.

Your guarantee is I presume already invalidated by your confession of opening it up. It is a wet afternoon here so a little video of something exploding might be fun. 

Go on, take one for the team.


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 13, 2019)

Nice comment T,
If i would have your arsenal of gear i wouldnt have a need of modding them.

In case of Qutest using a amp theres nothing to improve im not stupid.
But driving HP direct.. it might be.

I have my degree in electronics and am just curious. Have built or modified more gear in the past.

I bought this unit 2nd hand so have no warranty anyway.


----------



## Triode User

Reactcore said:


> Nice comment T,
> If i would have your arsenal of gear i wouldnt have a need of modding them.
> 
> In case of Qutest using a amp theres nothing to improve im not stupid.
> ...



Although I was having a bit of fun you are right that it is enjoyable to tinker and I am the worlds worst for giving in to temptation and taking the top off just to have a play. It will be interesting to see how you get on if you decide to have a go. (I am currently modding a 300B tube amp . . . )


----------



## Romi54

Is it possible to take the BNC jacks from the Qutest from the outside?


----------



## Reactcore

So now had some time with the supra USB
Must say it 'smoothens' the high end of the fq spectrum a bit. Very nice!
Although with some soft recorded music eg DSD, i sometimes prefer the bite of a simpler cable.


----------



## dac64

Romi54 said:


> Is it possible to take the BNC jacks from the Qutest from the outside?



Remove the BNC connectors, you meant ? 

No


----------



## nwavesailor (Oct 17, 2019)

Reactcore said:


> So now had some time with the supra USB
> Must say it 'smoothens' the high end of the fq spectrum a bit. Very nice!
> Although with some soft recorded music eg DSD, i sometimes prefer the bite of a simpler cable.



I agree @Reactcore, the Supra 2.0 USB cable is a keeper!

I also bought an inexpensive Furetech USB cable that had received a What HiFi award to try. It did have very nice connectors that were a bit tighter than the Supra. 

I did A /B comparisons with the Furetech and Supra, back to back, and on every swap the output of the Supra was higher than the Furetech. I changed nothing other than simply swapping the USB cables?


----------



## Romi54

dac64 said:


> Remove the BNC connectors, you meant ?
> 
> No



yes I mean ... ok pity .... thanks


----------



## dac64

Romi54 said:


> yes I mean ... ok pity .... thanks



It's easy to open the chassis to replace the BNC connectors. 

Can share what are you up to?


----------



## Romi54

I use a Uptone USB adapter, it sounds fantastic, but it is very short and I need more space for the ethernet connection and the BNC is in the way


----------



## IAIA

Is there a consensus on the use of conditioners such as SOtM tx-USBultra or iPurifier, as well as Rendu and SOtM streamers with Qutest? At the moment, I just have a laptop with Fidelizer and Audirvana, I'm happy with the sound, but maybe there is room for improvement?


----------



## soares

Oh yes there is especially when using a ‘normal’ computer. I don’t have any more my Qutest but I still keep my uRendu. It really makes a difference. 
It seems that there is a consensus with the others. You could also try an Isoregen. Not so good but it’s much less expensive. Use the uRendu with a good LPS. I use an sbooster but a LPS 1.2 it’s also fantastic. If you are short of money try to get an used package (uR + LPS). Finally if I may advice get a second hand Cisco 2960 switch. They can be find between 20 to 60 dólares. New  were more than 600. If you want to improve use an optical module to the Cisco or even better between the Cisco and the uR. A good power supply will also make a difference. I started with a Jameco (10 $). Much better than the one included. Looking forward to receiving my etherregen... Good luck


----------



## IAIA

soares said:


> Oh yes there is especially when using a ‘normal’ computer. I don’t have any more my Qutest but I still keep my uRendu. It really makes a difference.
> It seems that there is a consensus with the others. You could also try an Isoregen. Not so good but it’s much less expensive. Use the uRendu with a good LPS. I use an sbooster but a LPS 1.2 it’s also fantastic. If you are short of money try to get an used package (uR + LPS). Finally if I may advice get a second hand Cisco 2960 switch. They can be find between 20 to 60 dólares. New  were more than 600. If you want to improve use an optical module to the Cisco or even better between the Cisco and the uR. A good power supply will also make a difference. I started with a Jameco (10 $). Much better than the one included. Looking forward to receiving my etherregen... Good luck



Thanks for the answer. I forgot to mention that I don’t need network functions at all, I like my laptop and I’m only ready to consider buying network devices if it gives significant growth in SQ.


----------



## dac64

IAIA said:


> Thanks for the answer. I forgot to mention that I don’t need network functions at all, I like my laptop and I’m only ready to consider buying network devices if it gives significant growth in SQ.



Battery powered both, good enough.


----------



## soares

It will improve SQ if you use streaming services and probably if you also use cd files with an additional computer or a NAS. 

I never tried a battery with a Qutest, so I can’t comment. Used one (don’t remember the name) with my sonictransporter and I prefered the HDPLEX I’ve been using. Ultimately it will depend on the system you’re using and also the quality of the battery. Cheers


----------



## IAIA

soares said:


> It will improve SQ if you use streaming services and probably if you also use cd files with an additional computer or a NAS.



I use high quality cd-rips streaming from my external hard drive. My question is: Is a regular laptop inferior in sound quality than network devices? My system is pretty revelatory: Dynaudio Special 40 + Perreuax pre amp + Perreuax power amp.

Also, what is general agreement on the use of conditioners like IFI products?


----------



## soares

Sorry for not being sufficiently clear. I was not saying that network devices are superior to computers. I suggested that using a NAS or an additional computer might (and I say might) get you a better sound when using a good switch. The connection being by Ethernet, of course. I am saying this because I prefer the sound coming from my Zen MK III and my sonic transporter connected through my Cisco to the ultra rendu than connected directly to the uR. Turning to the starting point and from my experience what I am certain is that using a USB ‘reclocker’ improves substantially the SQ coming from a computer. Even a Zen MKIII. Best, Jorge


----------



## IAIA

soares said:


> Sorry for not being sufficiently clear. I was not saying that network devices are superior to computers. I suggested that using a NAS or an additional computer might (and I say might) get you a better sound when using a good switch. The connection being by Ethernet, of course. I am saying this because I prefer the sound coming from my Zen MK III and my sonic transporter connected through my Cisco to the ultra rendu than connected directly to the uR. Turning to the starting point and from my experience what I am certain is that using a USB ‘reclocker’ improves substantially the SQ coming from a computer. Even a Zen MKIII. Best, Jorge



OK, got it, thank you!


----------



## IAIA (Oct 24, 2019)

Has anybody had positive effect using Qutest with iPurifier 3?


----------



## betula

IAIA said:


> To my surprise the iFi iPurifier 3 improved clarity a lot with the 2Qute. Soon I will be able to test it with the Qutest. I am not expecting it to make as big of a difference as it does with the 2Qute but we shall see.
> 
> I've got the Pro iDSD here on loan, and it's DAC performance is absolutely impressive. It just controls the low-end so much better than 2Qute. It is also less bright and more dynamic. I just can't really go back to my 2Qute after the iDSD but I also can't afford to buy the iDSD and I wouldn't use 80% of its features anyway.
> 
> I really hope the Qutest will cure my issues and bring a slightly less bright sound but a more firm and confident low-end control versus 2Qute. I will report back in a few days.


Did you have good results with iPurifier 3?[/QUOTE]
Sold it after buying the Qutest. Didn't need it anymore.


----------



## IAIA

[/QUOTE]
Sold it after buying the Qutest. Didn't need it anymore.[/QUOTE]

Are you using PC?


----------



## OctavianH

For PC use this one with external power supply like, for example, Sbooster 5V:
https://jcat.eu/product/usb-card-femto/

Solved my problem for good.


----------



## IAIA

OctavianH said:


> For PC use this one with external power supply like, for example, Sbooster 5V:
> https://jcat.eu/product/usb-card-femto/
> 
> Solved my problem for good.



I use a laptop.


----------



## OctavianH

IAIA said:


> I use a laptop.



Then ISO Regen might be OK for you. I tried ISO Regen, iUSB3.0 nano and then JCAT. At the moment I use JCAT. ISO Regen was better for me than the iFi solution.


----------



## betula

Sold it after buying the Qutest. Didn't need it anymore.[/QUOTE]

Are you using PC?[/QUOTE]
Laptop


----------



## IAIA

OctavianH said:


> Then ISO Regen might be OK for you. I tried ISO Regen, iUSB3.0 nano and then JCAT. At the moment I use JCAT. ISO Regen was better for me than the iFi solution.


So would you say that JCAT is better than ISO Regen?


----------



## IAIA

betula said:


> Sold it after buying the Qutest. Didn't need it anymore.



Are you using PC?[/QUOTE]
Laptop[/QUOTE]
And is there anything sitting now between your laptop and DAC?


----------



## betula

[/QUOTE]And is there anything sitting now between your laptop and DAC?[/QUOTE]
Just a relatively good USB cable. With the Qutest I kept using a Jitterbug, with the TT2 I didn't need that either.


----------



## OctavianH

IAIA said:


> So would you say that JCAT is better than ISO Regen?



Every opinion here is based on own perception, but for me yes. JCAT > ISO Regen > iFi Audio nano iUSB3.0.

JCAT was connected in my PC on a PCIex2.0 slot and powered by Sbooster 5V + Sbooster Ultra.
ISO Regen was connected to the DAC with USPCB A>B Adapter and powered by a standard AC-DC plug and later with Sbooster BOTW MKII set ot 6.5V without the Sbooster Ultra (not supported when Sbooster was set to 6.5V).
iFi Audio nano iUSB3.0 was connected to iGalvanic3.0 and powered by its own power supply (iPower 9V I think).

I used the same USB cable which was QED Reference USB A-B 2m.

For me the JCAT was the best solution (with upgraded firmware to 2.0, I haven't tried it with first version firmware because when I bought it the v2 firmware was already available).
The ISO Regen with LPS was better than ISO Regen without it, and both better than iUSB3.0 nano. Many claim there is a big difference between iUSB3.0 nano and micro, the latest being much better but I haven't tried it.

As I said, this is based on my own perception, gear and so on...


----------



## IAIA

hifipassion said:


> In my opinion, the stock one cannot give great results.
> Powered from a IfI Micro iUSB 3.0, the Qutest gets things to another level.
> And getting a factory made BNC cable (like Audioquest Diamond, without adapters from coax I mean) could improve things further.
> For me, in order to have the biggest jump in quality,  you need these factors:
> ...


Do you mean connecting IFI USB-a to Qutest micro-USB? What about power specifications? Is it 5V?


----------



## jwbrent

IAIA said:


> Is there a consensus on the use of conditioners such as SOtM tx-USBultra or iPurifier, as well as Rendu and SOtM streamers with Qutest? At the moment, I just have a laptop with Fidelizer and Audirvana, I'm happy with the sound, but maybe there is room for improvement?



I will be getting a review sample of the relatively new British-made Stack Audio Link in early November. I believe the retail will be $900. This is a raspberry pi based bridge/streamer with some proprietary design elements.

I currently use a MacBook Air with the latest version of Audirvana with my Qutest, so it will be interesting to see if the Link outperforms my setup.


----------



## dinus777

would be very interesting to see Stack Audio Link vs Audirvana/Mac

Also, did you notice, Allo released new USBridge Sig, looks very interesting too



jwbrent said:


> I will be getting a review sample of the relatively new British-made Stack Audio Link in early November. I believe the retail will be $900. This is a raspberry pi based bridge/streamer with some proprietary design elements.
> 
> I currently use a MacBook Air with the latest version of Audirvana with my Qutest, so it will be interesting to see if the Link outperforms my setup.


----------



## IAIA

OctavianH said:


> Every opinion here is based on own perception, but for me yes. JCAT > ISO Regen > iFi Audio nano iUSB3.0.
> 
> JCAT was connected in my PC on a PCIex2.0 slot and powered by Sbooster 5V + Sbooster Ultra.
> ISO Regen was connected to the DAC with USPCB A>B Adapter and powered by a standard AC-DC plug and later with Sbooster BOTW MKII set ot 6.5V without the Sbooster Ultra (not supported when Sbooster was set to 6.5V).
> ...


Here, in Russia, only IFI is commercially distributed, I would have to order JCAT or ISO Regen blindly without home listening. But thanks anyway. Do you happen to know anything about


OctavianH said:


> Every opinion here is based on own perception, but for me yes. JCAT > ISO Regen > iFi Audio nano iUSB3.0.
> 
> JCAT was connected in my PC on a PCIex2.0 slot and powered by Sbooster 5V + Sbooster Ultra.
> ISO Regen was connected to the DAC with USPCB A>B Adapter and powered by a standard AC-DC plug and later with Sbooster BOTW MKII set ot 6.5V without the Sbooster Ultra (not supported when Sbooster was set to 6.5V).
> ...


Here in Russia only IFI gets commercially distributed, I would have to order JCAT or ISO Regen blindly without proper home listening(( But thanks anyway. Do you happen to know anything about SOtM tx-USBultra?


----------



## soares

https://audiobacon.net/2017/05/23/s...tor-review-the-ultimate-digital-defuzzer/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/audiobacon.net/2017/07/11/uptone-audio-iso-regen-review/

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...y-improve-the-sq-of-computer-audio-streaming/

https://www.google.com/search?q=usb...KHT6kBewQ_AUoBHoECA0QBA&biw=414&bih=718&dpr=2

Cheers Jorge


----------



## OctavianH (Oct 25, 2019)

IAIA said:


> Here, in Russia, only IFI is commercially distributed, I would have to order JCAT or ISO Regen blindly without home listening. But thanks anyway. Do you happen to know anything about
> 
> Here in Russia only IFI gets commercially distributed, I would have to order JCAT or ISO Regen blindly without proper home listening(( But thanks anyway. Do you happen to know anything about SOtM tx-USBultra?



Do not buy JCAT if you use a laptop like you mentioned before. JCAT can be mounted only in a Desktop PC on a motherboard with PCIex x16. This is how the card looks:







About the other device I do not know much, I stopped reading about USB filters or such stuff since I use this card.

Some notes about this card:
1) sound quality is drastically improved when you power it externally with a linear power supply (that's the idea, to separate PC switching PSU from the audio line)
2) some claim it works better when you use only 1 usb port (if I remember correctly there is a firmware upgrade for usage only with 1 USB active)
3) some claim it works better in PCIex 3.0 x16 ports than in PCIex 2.0 x16 ports (I'll try this soon when I upgrade my gaming rig)

So if you decide to go for this, try to satisfy also these 3 points.
And of course *DO NOT BUY IT FOR A LAPTOP!
*
You can also try to link the Qutest via Optical (there is on this thread a Lifatec glass cable all recommend) but you will be limited to 192KHz. I guess that solution if you have optical output is fine also.


----------



## Reactcore

Im using this thin client pc (model Wyse Dx0D). And installed a 4TB disk inside.
Its passively cooled (no ventilators) and has minimal interferring parts inside.
Psu is external.

I installed a stripped Win7 thin version with foobar and Jriver.
Im operating it with f2k and Jriver mobile remote app.
Works like charm.

And.. it doubles as a headphone stand


----------



## Romi54

soares said:


> https://audiobacon.net/2017/05/23/s...tor-review-the-ultimate-digital-defuzzer/amp/
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/audiobacon.net/2017/07/11/uptone-audio-iso-regen-review/
> 
> ...



Which is the best for the qutest?


----------



## IAIA

OctavianH said:


> Do not buy JCAT if you use a laptop like you mentioned before. JCAT can be mounted only in a Desktop PC on a motherboard with PCIex x16. This is how the card looks:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, thank you, guess I'll try IfI first, see how it goes))


----------



## kerisabe

IAIA said:


> Ok, thank you, guess I'll try IfI first, see how it goes))



have u considered using toslink from source to dac? Quite a “troublefree” solution compared to usb.


----------



## Hooster

kerisabe said:


> have u considered using toslink from source to dac? Quite a “troublefree” solution compared to usb.



Many people have reported that toslink sounds soft. Is that not a concern?

For example: "Starting with AudioQuest Carbon coaxial and AudioQuest Vodka Toslink digital cables, the difference was primarily in clarity. That is, the sound was less transparent and softer with the Toslink cable, and soundstage depth was reduced compared with that of the coaxial cable. The differences in sound quality between AudioQuest Toslink and coaxial cables running between the Oppo player and Arcam DAC were larger than I expected."

https://www.cnet.com/news/the-audio...do-digital-audio-connections-sound-different/


----------



## dac64

Hooster said:


> Many people have reported that toslink sounds soft. Is that not a concern?
> 
> For example: "Starting with AudioQuest Carbon coaxial and AudioQuest Vodka Toslink digital cables, the difference was primarily in clarity. That is, the sound was less transparent and softer with the Toslink cable, and soundstage depth was reduced compared with that of the coaxial cable. The differences in sound quality between AudioQuest Toslink and coaxial cables running between the Oppo player and Arcam DAC were larger than I expected."
> 
> https://www.cnet.com/news/the-audio...do-digital-audio-connections-sound-different/



not apple to apple

toslink from cd player has better details than USB from ripped copy. it could be cd wasn't proper ripped to HD.


----------



## kerisabe

Hooster said:


> Many people have reported that toslink sounds soft. Is that not a concern?
> 
> For example: "Starting with AudioQuest Carbon coaxial and AudioQuest Vodka Toslink digital cables, the difference was primarily in clarity. That is, the sound was less transparent and softer with the Toslink cable, and soundstage depth was reduced compared with that of the coaxial cable. The differences in sound quality between AudioQuest Toslink and coaxial cables running between the Oppo player and Arcam DAC were larger than I expected."
> 
> https://www.cnet.com/news/the-audio...do-digital-audio-connections-sound-different/



it also depends on the synergy of each system. Proper toslink in a proper system w synergy doesnt sound soft. Def eliminates the ground noise, even coming from a properly grounded source (active and passive grounding).


----------



## soares

Romi54 said:


> Which is the best for the qutest?



I am afraid I didn’t test all. I just tried a uRendu (that I still own) and a Isoregen (this one never with the Qutest).

The uRendu is an end-point that performs also isolation and reclocker functions. The Isoregen is just about isolation and reclocking. On a SQ basis, I find that the uRendu beats clearly the Isoregen. But it cost more than the double. If money is not a problem I would go for the uRendu or even the new model that uses a fiber connection. But you won’t be disappointed using the Isoregen. You could also look for a second hand one. Whatever is your choice, remember that You still can upgrade the SQ of your device with a good power supply. Good luck.


----------



## Romi54

Currently I have an Ultrarendu at the Qutest.
and think about buying an ISO Regen


----------



## IAIA

Arniesb said:


> Actually i dont Have Ifi galvanic, but have Nano usb 3.0. Ofcourse i will buy Ifi Galvanic later. It should be i think like this -  Idefender + ipower to Igalvanic and then To Dac. More info you can find on Ifi forums.
> In my system ifi nano usb + shielded cable helped tremendously, so now i ordered Wireworld Platinum starlight 7 to get best when it comes to fighting digital sound and getting cleanest sound.
> Yes great dacs sound awesome, but they not gonna clean all the mess from noisy power lines and radio frequencies contaminated sound.


Do you power your Qutest from Nano? Also have you bought Galvanic eventually? Wonder it may make any further improvement, considering that Qutest is advertised as galvanically isolated.


----------



## IAIA

JWahl said:


> I've placed my order for the Qutest.  I also placed an order for the iFi Nano iUSB to power the Qutest and "regen" the USB signal.
> 
> I can compare with stock if anyone is interested.  If it's not much difference, I may resell the latter.


I'm also considering buying IFI Nano. Do you power your Qutest from Nano or do you use Gemeni cables?


----------



## 474194 (Oct 31, 2019)

I started skimming from page 1 of this thread recently, so forgive if this has already been posted.

I recently acquired a Ghent Audio shielded USB power-only, no-data so thought this maybe a good option if needed to power one's Qutest.  I believe there was an DC to USB, but no photo so just throwing this out there.






I use it from a USB battery pack to an Raspberry Pi since I only work within the constraints of being transportable, but may come in handy if I go Qutest (Desktop) one day.


----------



## Victorr

Do you think the power supply from Raspberry 5V 2.5A is suitable for Qutest? This excess current of 0.5A will not hurt?


----------



## nick77 (Nov 1, 2019)

Victorr said:


> Do you think the power supply from Raspberry 5V 2.5A is suitable for Qutest? This excess current of 0.5A will not hurt?



That looks identical to the stock supply, if your looking for improvement I would say dont waist your time. There are no short cuts to upgrading the PS for improvement, my low noise DIY linear supply ran about $200 and provides a nice bump in performance.


----------



## plsvn

Victorr said:


> This excess current of 0.5A will not hurt?



a power supply does not push current into the device: the device draws what it needs from the power supply


----------



## Victorr

*nick77*
*plsvn*

Thank you for your answers.
I’m not looking for improvement (Rob Watts stated earlier that for this device the linear power supply is redundant and even harmful, and I completely agree with it.). I have two audio systems in different rooms (a personal computer with active monitors and headphones and a stationary Hi-Fi). It is very simple for me to transfer this small DAC from one system to another, but it is very burdensome to constantly remove and switch the power supply. Therefore, I need a second power supply so that I only disconnect the wires from the DAC and connect it in another place without unnecessary manipulation.


----------



## Romi54

Someone compared the Qutest with the Yggdrasil?


----------



## betula

Romi54 said:


> Someone compared the Qutest with the Yggdrasil?


Well, Yggy is almost 12kg (25lbs) and Qutest is 770g (1.6lbs).

They both seem to be top choices of DACs, although Yggie is getting a bit old. Qutest might have the edge in realistic sound and sound stage depth according to what I have read. 

I run a TT2 now so I am not really looking back to anything lesser.


----------



## BlakeT

Romi54 said:


> Someone compared the Qutest with the Yggdrasil?



One of these days I will compare.  Qutest is in my setup at work, Yggy A2 in my home (main) setup.  I like them both but I've never swapped them around.


----------



## Romi54

Ok, but there are people who see Yggdrasil on par with Dave.

That's why I'm asking


----------



## Romi54

BlakeT said:


> One of these days I will compare.  Qutest is in my setup at work, Yggy A2 in my home (main) setup.  I like them both but I've never swapped them around.



Take the Qutest home and compare both.


----------



## betula

Romi54 said:


> Ok, but there are people who see Yggdrasil on par with Dave.
> 
> That's why I'm asking


Those people probably didn't find their eyeglasses after getting up in the morning.


----------



## miketlse

BlakeT said:


> One of these days I will compare.  Qutest is in my setup at work, Yggy A2 in my home (main) setup.  I like them both but I've never swapped them around.


Yes a good test. For all of us our preferred solution at home, may be different to our preferred solution at work, where considerations like network access and installing apps or drivers, may be showstoppers.


----------



## betula

Every opinion is just one man's opinion (including mine). I have seen quite a few people preferring Hugo 2 to Yggdrasil.
I am not a good source as I have never had a chance to audition Yggdrasil, I am just going by my trustworthy reviewers and friends who heard both the Yggie and Chord DACs.
I have also read pretty much all available online literature on these DACs.
To me no DACs compete with Qutest under £2000. And no DAC/amps compete with TT2 under £4000. Chord does something right, which is realism and 3D space.
I am sure Yggie is a nice DAC if you are ready to embrace its bulkiness and weight, but these days you can pick one up for £1400 on the secondhand market: the exact same price of a secondhand Hugo2.
In my experience secondhand market indicates real value more than the original RRP does. Secondhand DAVE as a comparison is still above £5K.
I don't think Yggie competes with DAVE. IMO even TT2 destroys it. Regarding Qutest it might be a matter of preference.


----------



## knopi

I would buy easily Qutest becouse if you will want sell it one day it will hold much better value.


----------



## RuiNguyen

I sold my Yggy Analog Gen 2 and kept the Chord Qutest till now. To me and my brother, the Qutest is the better one. We have very different taste in music genres but we both think that the Yggy is dry and boring. The only thing makes Yggy better than Qutest is the overall detail but not too much. The system that I tried on the Qutest and Yggy was Sonus Faber Venere Signature, Tannoy Kensington GR, Monitor Audio Bronze 2, Mcintosh Ma6700, Accuphase E480, Denon PMA 1520 AE. I've compared AB Qutest and Dave. Qutest was 7/10 or 8/10 compared to DAVE. There is no way the Yggy is on par with the DAVE.


Romi54 said:


> Ok, but there are people who see Yggdrasil on par with Dave.
> 
> That's why I'm asking


----------



## BlakeT (Nov 11, 2019)

For me personally, DAC's are the one area in my systems where I have been hesitant to drop serious amounts of money.  My reasoning is, DAC's are very much a "flavor of the month" item (flavor of the year is probably more accurate).   Today's beloved DAC will be a "yeah, its a fine DAC, but it is easily beat by the new [insert model)".

I might try an M-Scaler at some point though.


----------



## Hooster (Nov 11, 2019)

RuiNguyen said:


> I sold my Yggy Analog Gen 2 and kept the Chord Qutest till now. To me and my brother, the Qutest is the better one. We have very different taste in music genres but we both think that the Yggy is dry and boring. The only thing makes Yggy better than Qutest is the overall detail but not too much. The system that I tried on the Qutest and Yggy was Sonus Faber Venere Signature, Tannoy Kensington GR, Monitor Audio Bronze 2, Mcintosh Ma6700, Accuphase E480, Denon PMA 1520 AE. I've compared AB Qutest and Dave. Qutest was 7/10 or 8/10 compared to DAVE. There is no way the Yggy is on par with the DAVE.



No surprise there. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-and-measurements-of-chord-qutest-dac.5981/

Yggy 86, Qutest 114


----------



## Liu Junyuan

betula said:


> Well, Yggy is almost 12kg (25lbs) and Qutest is 770g (1.6lbs).
> 
> They both seem to be top choices of DACs, although Yggie is getting a bit old. Qutest might have the edge in realistic sound and sound stage depth according to what I have read.
> 
> I run a TT2 now so I am not really looking back to anything lesser.



I came here because I am interested in the Qutest.

Yggy is far from dated. The A1 was released in 2015, I believe. The Dave very close to that. Even if the Dave was "getting a bit old" next year, would it not still be a good DAC? I think in ten years it will still be a great DAC. 
With that said, I am not sure if you know the Yggy received a major update to its analog board and will be upgraded to Unison USB early next year; the latter will be huge. My point is that the DAC is upgradable; it's not the same DAC as it was upon release, and one doesn't need to sell, say the A1, and buy an entirely new A2 version DAC, which is what every other company does. You have to sell your Chord TT if you want to upgrade to TT2.

My second point is that new <> better in audio. I use a vintage Sonic Frontiers DAC that I love. I sold my Yggy A1 because I preferred the Sonic Frontiers. In retrospect, I preferred Gungnir MB to Yggy A1. But Yggy A2 is a much different sounding DAC. 

Size depends on user. I have an audio rack. Many Yggy owners also use speakers. Not everyone uses size as a parameter. Others do. 

Now, on to Qutest: what are the strengths of TT2 over it? I am very interested.

Thanks!


----------



## dinus777

https://darko.audio/the-darko-dac-index/

According to darko.audio, Qutest is also ranked higher.


----------



## theveterans

Yggdrasil and Qutest both in division 1 BTW. The line up is arranged alphabetically. Hugo 2 is higher because it can act as headphone amp plus you can extend its features with 2Go even though its equal or lesser (non-galvanic isolation inputs) the sound quality of Qutest.

Still curious on how would M Scaler + DAVE fair against the dCS Bartok sitting at the Uber throne


----------



## Liu Junyuan

theveterans said:


> Yggdrasil and Qutest both in division 1 BTW. The line up is arranged alphabetically. Hugo 2 is higher because it can act as headphone amp plus you can extend its features with 2Go even though its equal or lesser (non-galvanic isolation inputs) the sound quality of Qutest.
> 
> Still curious on how would M Scaler + DAVE fair against the dCS Bartok sitting at the Uber throne



Dave + M Scaler is my dream setup for Utopia. But there are so many great options at lower "divisions." Some of my best memories in the hobby were with sub $600 chans + HE-500/HD650


----------



## BlakeT (Nov 12, 2019)

betula said:


> Every opinion is just one man's opinion (including mine)..



I agree with you in general terms on general topics.  Like you, I also read every review I can get my hands on when considering audio purchases.  After all, I don't have the time, interest or money to try every available option within my budget and I use reviews to narrow my lists.  I always consider the source when reading reviews and comments.  However, on this specific topic, I suppose I would also say that not all opinions should be weighted equally.  I believe Torq's opinion with respect to DAC's is worth more than pretty much anyone else I am aware of.

1. Torq has the time, interest and money needed to buy the majority of all of the higher performing DAC's people are interested in.  From reasonably priced to cost-no-object. (dCS, MSB, TotalDac, etc.)
2. This is Torq's money, he didn't accept free gear or discounts as he wanted no bias or favoritism.  He bought them all, and then had to sell them off, taking the financial hit.
3.  He was willing to go through the painstaking process of comparing all these DAC's and then taking huge amounts of time to provide a write-up with his results for all to see.
4.  Torq's headphone and speaker rigs are absolutely SOTA systems, capable of revealing everything.
5.  These DAC's were tested in his systems, with his music.  This is absolutely key, and something people gloss over.  They hear a DAC at a headphone meet, with an unfamiliar amp or music and then try to draw conclusions about the DAC.
6.  At some level, listening for, and then comparing sonic attributes is a learned skill, gained through personal experience of conducting these experiments.


Now, lest anyone question Torq's sonic tastes or hearing abilities all Chord fans should also know that after listening to the majority of the greatest DAC's in the world, Torq ended up with Chord DAC's (Dave with Blu-MK2 and TT2 with Hugo M-Scaler) as his references and preferred DAC's, and he can afford to buy any DAC on the planet.  Although he indicates he still has and very much enjoys the Yggy A2 when he just wants to listen to music, and also uses the RME ADI-2 for a reference for comparison purposes.

See e.g.

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/57357-chord-hugo-2-upgrade-m-scaler-or-tt2/

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/57062-upgrading-from-my-yiggy/

I personally believe Torq's DAC thread is right up there with the greatest contributions from any forum member on any audio forum, of all time.  Joining others like this one: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared.634201/


----------



## Richardhoos

Probably a silly question but something I can’t figure out and has me confused.

How do I use a Bluesound Node 2i with the Qutest via coax to the BNC ports? Is there a special adapter needed? 

Right now I’m using optical but I was curious to try coaxial as well, I’m just unfamiliar with “BNC” ... 

Thanks!


----------



## BlakeT

Richardhoos said:


> Probably a silly question but something I can’t figure out and has me confused.
> 
> How do I use a Bluesound Node 2i with the Qutest via coax to the BNC ports? Is there a special adapter needed?
> 
> ...



You will need a coax to bnc adaptor in order to use your coax cable.


----------



## Triode User

Richardhoos said:


> Probably a silly question but something I can’t figure out and has me confused.
> 
> How do I use a Bluesound Node 2i with the Qutest via coax to the BNC ports? Is there a special adapter needed?
> 
> ...



if you have bnc at both ends of the cable then a simple converter like this will sort you out at the Node 2i end. 

4 x BNC FEMALE TO RCA PHONO MALE CONNECTORS CCTV CABLE DVR https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00DUEDDLG/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_tai_FVWYDbJK6G69N


----------



## Hooster

dinus777 said:


> https://darko.audio/the-darko-dac-index/
> 
> According to darko.audio, Qutest is also ranked higher.



I just had a look at that list and I would take it with a huge grain of salt. If the Mojo is in division 2, then the stuff in division 5 and below must be really really bad... I think you have to try these for yourself rather than believe such a list.


----------



## nwavesailor

I just received a notice that The Cable Company has added the Hugo TT2 and M Scaler to their lending library. This could be a way to have an in house demo if you don't have a Chord dealer in your area. 5% is the non refundable deposit good for any purchase.
I have no affiliation with the Cable Co.


----------



## miketlse

Hooster said:


> I just had a look at that list and I would take it with a huge grain of salt. If the Mojo is in division 2, then the stuff in division 5 and below must be really really bad... I think you have to try these for yourself rather than believe such a list.


Yes i agree. The use of the phrase 'subjective value quotient' means that Darko's ranking will be contested, by virtually everyone else, because everyone is almost guaranteed to allocate different values for some of the subjective criteria. Maybe that achieves Darko's goal, of getting a lot of readers so annoyed by the rankings, that they click links and generate advertising income for him.

I am surprised that for the Premier League, the Hugo2 is ranked equal with the DAVE, although it certainly represents good value for money.
Unfortunately the ranking excludes the TT2, because it would be interesting to see whether he ranked it higher than the Hugo2.


----------



## greenblured

First post! Hi!  My set-up is ; Qobus>IpadPro 10.5 ,512gb>cca>supra usb>Qutest>Beyerdynamic A20>Hd800&650. Using the 2 V out from Qutest. Qutest replaced my old Dac-magic 100 and Aune dac/amp combo. Not yet tried the 3 V  .Did 1 V. Killed the 800, no bass, anemic. Fine with the 650 at very low listening levels. Will oc test it with 3 V op. With highres clasical recording will prob be exelent, but will prob clipp? Listening to King Crimson 44.1 by Qutest vs Dac- magic 100 with same amp(a20) is a for me huge diference. My question is; Whitch se st amp will make a solide improvement under 2 k?


----------



## dinus777

greenblured said:


> First post! Hi!  My set-up is ; Qobus>IpadPro 10.5 ,512gb>cca>supra usb>Qutest>Beyerdynamic A20>Hd800&650. Using the 2 V out from Qutest. Qutest replaced my old Dac-magic 100 and Aune dac/amp combo. Not yet tried the 3 V  .Did 1 V. Killed the 800, no bass, anemic. Fine with the 650 at very low listening levels. Will oc test it with 3 V op. With highres clasical recording will prob be exelent, but will prob clipp? Listening to King Crimson 44.1 by Qutest vs Dac- magic 100 with same amp(a20) is a for me huge diference. My question is; Whitch se st amp will make a solide improvement under 2 k?



sell Qutest and Beyerdynamic A20 and buy Hugo TT2


----------



## greenblured

Thank you for the response. Yes, will start up saving. TT2 it will be


----------



## Lodwales81

greenblured said:


> First post! Hi!  My set-up is ; Qobus>IpadPro 10.5 ,512gb>cca>supra usb>Qutest>Beyerdynamic A20>Hd800&650. Using the 2 V out from Qutest. Qutest replaced my old Dac-magic 100 and Aune dac/amp combo. Not yet tried the 3 V  .Did 1 V. Killed the 800, no bass, anemic. Fine with the 650 at very low listening levels. Will oc test it with 3 V op. With highres clasical recording will prob be exelent, but will prob clipp? Listening to King Crimson 44.1 by Qutest vs Dac- magic 100 with same amp(a20) is a for me huge diference. My question is; Whitch se st amp will make a solide improvement under 2 k?


I have similar setup however my amp is the beyerdynamic a20 and headphones the beyerdynamic t1 g2. I believe the beyerdynamic amps all seem to add compression to the sound to kind of balance out all low middle and high gains, this is why they are popular with mastering.


----------



## greenblured

Yea, afraid something like the v200 will make no improvment in my set up. TT2 I am sure will.


----------



## betula

greenblured said:


> Yea, afraid something like the v200 will make no improvment in my set up. TT2 I am sure will.


A different amp with the Qutest could be an improvement, but not as much as the TT2. IMO in your case the V200 would just bring a different taste. I used Qutest with CMA600i and Taurus MKII. The Taurus was a clear improvement in clarity and bass/treble extension, authority to the 600i. Still, my TT2 is on another level compared to both these Qutest combos. 
I tried the Taurus with the TT2 too just out of curiosity and I found it was just degrading the sound, killing transparency, balance and resolution (added distortion). 
Go for TT2 if you can afford it. It was a relatively big investment for me too, but keeping TT2 as my DAC/amp for headphone listening for the years to come might actually be a more budget conscious decision instead of buying and selling other DACs and amps in the 1-2K category. 
Up to 4K it doesn't really get better than the TT2.


----------



## greenblured

betula said:


> A different amp with the Qutest could be an improvement, but not as much as the TT2. IMO in your case the V200 would just bring a different taste. I used Qutest with CMA600i and Taurus MKII. The Taurus was a clear improvement in clarity and bass/treble extension, authority to the 600i. Still, my TT2 is on another level compared to both these Qutest combos.
> I tried the Taurus with the TT2 too just out of curiosity and I found it was just degrading the sound, killing transparency, balance and resolution (added distortion).
> Go for TT2 if you can afford it. It was a relatively big investment for me too, but keeping TT2 as my DAC/amp for headphone listening for the years to come might actually be a more budget conscious decision instead of buying and selling other DACs and amps in the 1-2K category.
> Up to 4K it doesn't really get better than the TT2.


Agree, TT2 will be my next dac/amp.


----------



## greenblured

Did a 3v test . Def clipping over 12 o'clock with the A20. Qobuz BBC so Elgar cello conserto -Jean-Guihen Queras. The bass goes deeper, more clear with the 2v setting.


----------



## Nik74

2V is the green colour lights at start up , correct?


----------



## greenblured

Nik74 said:


> 2V is the green colour lights at start up , correct?


No, 2v is blue. 1v is red, 3v is green.


----------



## Nik74

My manual has the colour coding wrong, it states 1V red, 2V green , 3V blue. My ears tell me your suggestion is right, but I wanted to ask and make sure I m not going crazy!


----------



## greenblured

Nik74 said:


> My manual has the colour coding wrong, it states 1V red, 2V green , 3V blue. My ears tell me your suggestion is right, but I wanted to ask and make sure I m not going crazy!


The cycle goes; red-blue-green.


----------



## Romi54

Big improvement for Qutest?

Uptone LPS 1.2 !


----------



## jwbrent

Chord should make an external power supply for the Qutest with a matching chassis. I’ve read so many posts on this thread about users finding an after-market LPS that makes the Qutest sound better, and I imagine there is some validity in their claims.

I’m still using the stock wall-wart, and I suppose at some point I might try an alternative; but since tweaking the Qutest is so popular, Chord could make some money.


----------



## greenblured

Depends on the grid. For me I see no good reason to 'upgrade' the ps. The grid is dead solid with no spikes or outakes ever. Unstable grid- go battery.


----------



## Rob Watts

Nik74 said:


> My manual has the colour coding wrong, it states 1V red, 2V green , 3V blue. My ears tell me your suggestion is right, but I wanted to ask and make sure I m not going crazy!



The manual is definitely correct - 1v red, 2v green, 3v blue.


----------



## Nik74 (Nov 18, 2019)

Thanks for clarifying and sorry if I created confusion.


----------



## IAIA

So would you say that iPower 5V should be used in combination with AC iPurifier? Have you tried to use them separately? Is this combination distinctly better than stock ps? Thanks)


----------



## Reactcore

Nice to see Rob is still checking this forum seemed a bit all activity regarding qutest moved to Mscaler thread.


----------



## IAIA

kerisabe said:


> I’m also running an IFI ipower with my qutest, and i am definitely sure it is not garbage. I am separating the ipower from the rest of the component in the power strip using an ac ipurifier (plugging the ipower at the end of the power strip, with the ac ipurifier in front if it). Definite improvement compared to the stock smps, more separation, more air. Will there be more/bigger improvement using better/more expensive psu in the



So would you say that iPower 5V should be used in combination with AC iPurifier? Have you tried to use them separately? Thanks)


----------



## IAIA

jbarrentine said:


> Got the iFi 5v power for what it's worth. I doubt there's a discernible difference. Just checking boxes.


Did you notice positive results? Thanks.


----------



## Victorr

Chord Company & Chord Electronics - same, relatives or namesakes? 
I buy wires for Qutest and I just had a question about this. Although it does not matter ..


----------



## Triode User

Victorr said:


> Chord Company & Chord Electronics - same, relatives or namesakes?
> I buy wires for Qutest and I just had a question about this. Although it does not matter ..



As far as I am aware there is no connection at all between the two companies and the only thing they have in common is the word 'Chord' in their names.


----------



## Victorr

Triode User said:


> As far as I am aware there is no connection at all between the two companies and the only thing they have in common is the word 'Chord' in their names.



Well, okay. So they are namesake. And both from the United Kingdom. But they make a cable of decent quality (Chord Company).


----------



## greenblured

Rob Watts said:


> The manual is definitely correct - 1v red, 2v green, 3v blue.


Very strange. on my Qutest on upstart the cycle goes red-blue- green when switching. So it switch red(1v)>blue(3v)>green(2v)? If so, the 3v is the best sounding on my set up.


----------



## greenblured

oh well, the colour settings/display on Chord products can be confusing lol.


----------



## JezR

greenblured said:


> oh well, the colour settings/display on Chord products can be confusing lol.



I think the confusion arises when you look at the manual and assume the colours move from left to right as per the manual, just read the colours from the manual right to left and it makes sense.

Whatever voltage you're on it will always be, Blue > Green > Red


----------



## kerisabe

IAIA said:


> So would you say that iPower 5V should be used in combination with AC iPurifier? Have you tried to use them separately? Thanks)



i would suggest using them combined. The function of ac ipurifier used alongside the ipower is to “isolate” / “separate” the ipower from the rest of the components.


----------



## greenblured

JezR said:


> I think the confusion arises when you look at the manual and assume the colours move from left to right as per the manual, just read the colours from the manual right to left and it makes sense.
> 
> Whatever voltage you're on it will always be, Blue > Green > Red


Got it, but using colour as indicator for voltage out may seem not to be optimal. There should be a dedicatet bulb for the v-output. That would make things intuitivet. That said; not a fan of the bulb and collours, Change it wih a more direct display; Let say a red letter 1v etc. Cryptic display is not a good thing. Gives me a headache.


----------



## IAIA

kerisabe said:


> i would suggest using them combined. The function of ac ipurifier used alongside the ipower is to “isolate” / “separate” the ipower from the rest of the components.


Should it be isolated because it iPower is impulse ps?


----------



## kerisabe

IAIA said:


> Should it be isolated because it iPower is impulse ps?



in general it would be preferable for each component to be isolated from each other.


----------



## Romi54

@Rob Watts 

Is sufficient for the Qutest 4.9V as a performance or you then have disadvantages?


----------



## Rob Watts

I am not sure I fully understand your question - I assume you are referring to the PSU voltage on the micro USB. 4.9v is fine as a USB input voltage. All power rails are regulated internally, so the absolute value of the PSU voltage is unimportant - as long as it meets USB specs of 5v +/- 0.25v.


----------



## Richardhoos

I currently have a Qutest that I’m using with a Gilmore Lite amp and my ZMF Verite.

I do love what I’m hearing but I just came into a balanced cable and am considering the AURALiC Taurus amp (used) as upgrade over the GL. I had considered the HeadAmp GSX-mini but it’s out of my price range. Any thoughts on the qutest + taurus pair? 

I’m concerned it would be too bright? Any thoughts? Thanks friends!

Rich


----------



## betula

Richardhoos said:


> I currently have a Qutest that I’m using with a Gilmore Lite amp and my ZMF Verite.
> 
> I do love what I’m hearing but I just came into a balanced cable and am considering the AURALiC Taurus amp (used) as upgrade over the GL. I had considered the HeadAmp GSX-mini but it’s out of my price range. Any thoughts on the qutest + taurus pair?
> 
> ...


I used to own the Qutest Taurus pairing. I was also expecting it to sound a bit bright, but it is not. It is actually on the warmish side of neutral with a solid amount of bass. I never heard the Gilmore, so can't compare. I was going to buy the Mini too, but ended up with a TT2 instead and not looking back.
One more thought on the Taurus, that the balanced out sounds better (cleaner, tighter) than the SE output, so you will want a balanced cable as well.


----------



## Richardhoos

Thanks, Butela! Great to hear your thoughts.


----------



## dinus777

I think soon Chord will announce few new products: 2go and  maybe something else. I hope if they managed to complete 2go , maybe Qutest range network streamer coming


----------



## Ivodam

dinus777 said:


> I think soon Chord will announce few new products: 2go and  maybe something else. I hope if they managed to complete 2go , maybe Qutest range network streamer coming



I would be really happy to see a next Quest with a jacked power supply and a power switch and with XLR outputs, I do not think this is something too much to expect from the respected company... They have it already in the same body in the Huei phono stage, so I know it is absolutely possible.


----------



## Arniesb

Ivodam said:


> I would be really happy to see a next Quest with a jacked power supply and a power switch and with XLR outputs, I do not think this is something too much to expect from the respected company... They have it already in the same body in the Huei phono stage, so I know it is absolutely possible.


well... good power supply require more expense + more expense for bigger casing = less profit.


----------



## Hooster

Arniesb said:


> well... good power supply require more expense + more expense for bigger casing = less profit.



If they make it properly they sell more units = more profit, even if each unit costs a few $ more to make.


----------



## Ivodam

Arniesb said:


> well... good power supply require more expense + more expense for bigger casing = less profit.



Well, as I said, it has already been done, in the same casing.


----------



## ecwl

greenblured said:


> Got it, but using colour as indicator for voltage out may seem not to be optimal. There should be a dedicatet bulb for the v-output. That would make things intuitivet. That said; not a fan of the bulb and collours, Change it wih a more direct display; Let say a red letter 1v etc. Cryptic display is not a good thing. Gives me a headache.


I just noticed this post. I recommended a friend to buy the Qutest and he complained of the same problem. I ended up referring him to YouTube review videos online to see how things are set because I’m too allergic to his cat to help him set it up and I don’t own a Qutest. What I found out later was that when you turn on Qutest, it cycles through the colours because that’s the time for setting the DC servo but that has nothing to do with the voltage settings and my friend was confused that he can press the buttons to set the voltage during this time. He was also holding onto the Filter and Input buttons either indefinitely or he’s watching the color change and pressing the buttons super quickly. I believe you’re supposed to press them and see the color change. If it still seems confusing, it’s best to see those YouTube reviews as to how the voltage is set.


----------



## kerisabe

Does anyone here uses the ifi idefender 3.0 in their qutest x macbook pro usb setup? Do you need the “clean usb power” input on the idefender for the handshake? Apparently last week ive tried switching from optical connection (lifatec glass) to just an atlas usb cable and surprisingly the sound seems more dynamic, more alive (which wasnt the case i started using usb connection and found optical to be better in the beginning) So im thinking of cutting the usb power off the macbook pro using the idefender. Hope to hear inputs on this thanks.


----------



## theveterans

kerisabe said:


> Does anyone here uses the ifi idefender 3.0 in their qutest x macbook pro usb setup? Do you need the “clean usb power” input on the idefender for the handshake? Apparently last week ive tried switching from optical connection (lifatec glass) to just an atlas usb cable and surprisingly the sound seems more dynamic, more alive (which wasnt the case i started using usb connection and found optical to be better in the beginning) So im thinking of cutting the usb power off the macbook pro using the idefender. Hope to hear inputs on this thanks.



I think you're either going to get a very slight improvement at best or no improvement at worst. In addition, the USB input is already galvanically isolated so adding iDefender might be much less effective in improving the sound compared to USBs without galvanic isolation.


----------



## miketlse

I used to find usb input for mojo, slightly more dynamic and alive than optical input. Unfortunately they tend to be synonyms for added RFI and noise.


----------



## kerisabe

miketlse said:


> I used to find usb input for mojo, slightly more dynamic and alive than optical input. Unfortunately they tend to be synonyms for added RFI and noise.



that is true, thats what i felt when i changed from optical to usb before ive got clean electricity in my system (isolation transformer). But now that dynamic im talkin about is different. I dont know how to explain it but its just alot of air and some frequencies just sound effortless and right. It breathes better, more relaxed.


----------



## kerisabe

For those using usb w qutest, ive tried using an ifi idefender usb3.0 which has ground auto , so it disconnect electricity current on your usb cable once the “handshake” process is done. Sounds alot quieter. Next will try to input clean 5v power on the idefender and see if that improves the sound.


----------



## nwavesailor

Any downside to using a Furman PST-8D conditioner for AC with the Qutest?


----------



## cotic54

I have a Furman (not the same model) and it made no change to the way my system sounded, just a neat way of plugging everything in. If you want to improve sound try an Anker 5v battery, it makes a nice step up in sound quality.


----------



## kerisabe

@Rob Watts Rob, does the qutest needs the vbus power from source for the “handshake” , or is the usb input powered internally ? Thank you.


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes it needs the VBUS from the source to power the USB decoder chip, which is placed at the source side of the galvanic isolator - this means that the decoding noise cannot affect the DAC.


----------



## kerisabe

Rob Watts said:


> Yes it needs the VBUS from the source to power the USB decoder chip, which is placed at the source side of the galvanic isolator - this means that the decoding noise cannot affect the DAC.


Thank you for answering @Rob Watts Rob. Much appreciated. The other day i have tried installing the ifi idefender 3.0 (used to cut the vbus from source) but it needs a clean power connected through its female usb micro slot on the idefender. I didnt connect any power but it still worked. That is why im asking this question. Cause without the power the qutest still recognized the macbook pro. Can you please clarify @iFi audio ? Thank you.


----------



## iFi audio

kerisabe said:


> Can you please clarify @iFi audio ?



Clarify what exactly, if we may ask?


----------



## officerdibble

I have the Qutest partnered with my Schiit Asgard 3 preamplifier which is connected to my Matrix Audio Mini-i Amp. 

I have set the output to 1v but there is still too much gain. On the volume dial - 7pm is loud, 9pm too loud.

Am I doing something wrong?

Is my best option some Rothwell Attenuators? If yes - 10, 15 or 20db?

Sorry I have zero knowledge on how I should have partnered these electronics!


----------



## kerisabe

iFi audio said:


> Clarify what exactly, if we may ask?



do i need to connect a clean source of 5v power to the ifi idefender 3.0 when using it w qutest? @iFi audio


----------



## nwavesailor

cotic54 said:


> If you want to improve sound try an Anker 5v battery, it makes a nice step up in sound quality.



Have others found the Anker 5 volt battery to be a step up from the OEM wall-wart PS?


----------



## iFi audio

kerisabe said:


> do i need to connect a clean source of 5v power to the ifi idefender 3.0 when using it w qutest? @iFi audio



If a DAC is self-powered, you don't need to connect external 5V line, iDefender3.0 will work without it.


----------



## ecwl

officerdibble said:


> I have the Qutest partnered with my Schiit Asgard 3 preamplifier which is connected to my Matrix Audio Mini-i Amp.
> 
> I have set the output to 1v but there is still too much gain. On the volume dial - 7pm is loud, 9pm too loud.
> 
> ...


Hmmm. Isn’t there a low gain switch at the back of your Schiit?


----------



## Triode User

ecwl said:


> Hmmm. Isn’t there a low gain switch at the back of your Schiit?



the gain switch is on the front of the Asgard 3 preamp.


----------



## ecwl

Triode User said:


> the gain switch is on the front of the Asgard 3 preamp.


Haha. I was reading the product website’s specs page. I should have just looked at the photos which clearly shows the gain switch in front.


----------



## officerdibble

ecwl said:


> Hmmm. Isn’t there a low gain switch at the back of your Schiit?


Hi. Yeah I have it switched to low gain.


----------



## Romi54

When Dave has 100% sound quality.

How much does the Hugo TT2 have? - XXX %

How much the Qutest? - XXX %


----------



## miketlse

Romi54 said:


> When Dave has 100% sound quality.
> 
> How much does the Hugo TT2 have? - XXX %
> 
> How much the Qutest? - XXX %


Try reading this post https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hug...official-thread.879425/page-543#post-15361642
Christer is a very demanding music lover, and he reckons the Qutest + MScaler beats the DAVE on its own.
Other owners rank the DAVE above all the other dacs.
You will not find a 100% consensus.


----------



## norliss

Hey @Rob Watts - I wonder if I could ask you a question?

Sources such as Squeezebox Touch or RPi 4 don't 'switch off' per se (unless you unplug them) and therefore their output signal to the DAC is constant regardless of whether music is playing. Would there be any adverse effects with respect to the longevity of the Qutest i.e. would it be advisable to switch over to an unused input source when not in use or does it make no difference?


----------



## Rob Watts

Don't worry, a dithered source makes no difference to reliability. And an SPDIF that is transmitting digital zero will also make no difference.


----------



## norliss

Rob Watts said:


> Don't worry, a dithered source makes no difference to reliability. And an SPDIF that is transmitting digital zero will also make no difference.



Thanks @Rob Watts for your reply. Do you anticipate the 'port hole' and source/filter lights on the Qutest having a long life?


----------



## Richardhoos

How subtle do most find the filter options?

I don’t hear any difference at all actually, and wondering if others feel the same? Perhaps my ears just aren’t discerning enough, which is certainly possible.

The other thing I thought of.. is it possible it has something to do with my other components for some reason? (streaming Qobuz from iPhone to Qutest, listening to ZMF Verite closed from Taurus amp).

I absolutely love the set up. By using the orange or red filter on the Qutest I was hoping to be able to inch up on volume as much as possible while minimizing the treble (a bit treble sensitive), but I don’t hear a difference as I said.

Thoughts? Thanks!


----------



## nwavesailor (Dec 20, 2019)

Richardhoos said:


> How subtle do most find the filter options?
> 
> I don’t hear any difference at all actually, and wondering if others feel the same? Perhaps my ears just aren’t discerning enough, which is certainly possible.
> 
> ...



I'm with you on the 'filters', at least with my ears and Empy's!
I should have ZMF Verite open next week,  but not expecting to hear much (or anything?) with the 4 Qutest filter options using a different hp.

I admit I DON'T have bat ears and am treble sensitive as well.
I _really_ try to hear the various filters, but with no success, other than seeing the ball color change and 'hoping' it then sounds a hair warmer.

I have to think it is measurable, or it wouldn't be on the DAC, but _not _audible at least with my ears!


----------



## 211276

The filters are subtle but I can detect differences.  The optimum for my ears on my system is green. I find white slightly harsh and orange a bit dull. My Qutest is partnered with the Mscaler. Before connecting ferrite rings to the BNC cables I was using the orange filter. The green filter was operational before purchasing the Mscaler. It seems RF was causing some harshness.  I believe Rob Watts has said somewhere that if the orange or red filters are required the rest of the system is on the bright side.


----------



## Roybenz

I hear tiny difference. On some songs i cant tell the difference at all. Also like the green best with the moon neo 430. And lcd 4.


----------



## nwavesailor

They may be so subtle that I simply can't hear them. I've been toggling through the 4 filters, w/o leaving any on for very long, expecting to hear differences.
I'll try the green and use that as my default setting for now.


----------



## betula

To me the differences between filters are also extremely subtle. I for sure wouldn't be able to tell in a blind test, which filter is on.


----------



## Richardhoos

Thanks all. I just wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing something. I think I’ll go double green (filter and voltage)!


----------



## nwavesailor

You are not alone, @Richardhoos!      At best folks seem to find the differences from subtle to tiny.
Even if I 'think' I am hearing a slight difference (because the colors of the balls say so) in a DBT I doubt I could pick out what filter I was listening to.


----------



## Jon L

Qutest filters do make subtle sound differences, but If that's not enough, one can try a decent upsampling program for certain purposes.  For example, while well-recorded, clean albums sounds fantastic on their own, I sometimes listen to electronica, club music, which benefit greatly from upsampling to 176.4 kHz via Foobar's PPHS (Ultra) upsampler, which smoothes out the top end, making them less naked-sounding, while retaining most of the detail.  




1221191639a_HDR by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## Roybenz (Dec 23, 2019)

Would it be best to plug the ifi ipower straight in the wallsocket or into my Isotek venus
powerfilter? 

Maybe using Stock psu and plugging it in the powerfilter would be best solution?


----------



## sjt1970

First post on here. i have a Qutest since about 3 weeks and its great. I am using it mainly with USB input. I have a dedicated DAS (a mini ITX box with internal HDD and running Daphile OS) connected to Qutest using an 8m Supra USB cable. I get the occasional click on the sound over USB - could this be caused by the long USB cable length? In general are there problems with the long cable length? Thanks in advance for any helpful replies.


----------



## miketlse

sjt1970 said:


> First post on here. i have a Qutest since about 3 weeks and its great. I am using it mainly with USB input. I have a dedicated DAS (a mini ITX box with internal HDD and running Daphile OS) connected to Qutest using an 8m Supra USB cable. I get the occasional click on the sound over USB - could this be caused by the long USB cable length? In general are there problems with the long cable length? Thanks in advance for any helpful replies.


When do you get the clicks, at the start of tracks, or during the middle of tracks?


----------



## sjt1970

miketlse said:


> When do you get the clicks, at the start of tracks, or during the middle of tracks?


In general its in the middle rather than at the start, it seems random, but there might be more towards the earlier part of a song. They are only occasional.


----------



## miketlse

sjt1970 said:


> In general its in the middle rather than at the start, it seems random, but there might be more towards the earlier part of a song. They are only occasional.


That narrows things down a bit:

Clicks at the start of tracks, can be caused if the bitrate of the tracks changes, and the dac has to pause until the correct new bitrate has been identified, and the data buffer filled with the correct data
Clicks during tracks can be caused if a phone or PC, pauses the usb data flow to be paused, whilst another task such as screen update, or memory update, etc is performed. This can usually be cured by fine tuning the phone/PC settings (unless watching a video, the screen update can be reduced in priority)
Clicks can also be caused by RFI from fridges, a/c units, garage doors etc, but it is much easier to check/eliminate bullet point 2 first
What music player are you using on your DAS?


----------



## ecwl

sjt1970 said:


> First post on here. i have a Qutest since about 3 weeks and its great. I am using it mainly with USB input. I have a dedicated DAS (a mini ITX box with internal HDD and running Daphile OS) connected to Qutest using an 8m Supra USB cable. I get the occasional click on the sound over USB - could this be caused by the long USB cable length? In general are there problems with the long cable length? Thanks in advance for any helpful replies.


I was under the impression that USB cable maximum length should be 3-5m. Anything longer can be unreliable. Unfortunately there is no way to know if your USB cable length is the problem without using a much shorter one to test it out. As others have pointed out other possibilities for the clicks. But I would start testing shorter 1-2m USB cables first if possible.


----------



## Triode User

ecwl said:


> I was under the impression that USB cable maximum length should be 3-5m. Anything longer can be unreliable. Unfortunately there is no way to know if your USB cable length is the problem without using a much shorter one to test it out. As others have pointed out other possibilities for the clicks. But I would start testing shorter 1-2m USB cables first if possible.



I also thought that 5m was the usual max recommended USB cable length.


----------



## sjt1970

OK thanks all. I can move the DAS nearer to the rest of the gear and give a short USB cable a try. I will report back,


----------



## miketlse

sjt1970 said:


> OK thanks all. I can move the DAS nearer to the rest of the gear and give a short USB cable a try. I will report back,


Great. At least everyone has been able to suggest some avenues to explore, to try and solve your issue.


----------



## snatex

What amplifier pairings go best with a Qutest and high impedance TOTL headphones like the LCD4/Abyss/Susvara etc?


----------



## miketlse

snatex said:


> What amplifier pairings go best with a Qutest and high impedance TOTL headphones like the LCD4/Abyss/Susvara etc?



Here is one example post https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...official-thread.869417/page-193#post-14724165


----------



## sjt1970

miketlse said:


> Great. At least everyone has been able to suggest some avenues to explore, to try and solve your issue.


OK Reporting back!

I moved the DAS nearer the Qutest and used the cable that came with the Qutest. There were fewer clicks. Then I discovered that there were clicks on the recording I was using to test! This is a 24/192 recording of Ladies of the Canyon by Joni Mitchell. I noticed that the clicks were always coming in the same places in the songs after I moved the DAS. For example one about 12 sec into the first song, Morning Morgantown. Then I tried an old CD rip and the same clicks were on that as well. Then I tried the different versions of the LP streamed from Qobuz – on these as well. Other recordings I have tried recently have no or very few clicks (sometimes you can’t tell if you are playing electronica because they often put click like sounds on the record itself). So I think I have eliminated most random clicks and am hearing ones on the recordings now – I think I missed them before I got the Qutest – I can only guess because the Qutest picks out details more clearly.

I also tried a “better” USB cable – an Audioquest Carbon USB 1.5m. I think this makes a definite improvement over the cable that came with the Qutest. I think there is an improvement in clarity and coherence with the AQ cable over the standard one. I think there is greater separation between the different elements in the music but they fit together better. In general the music seems to have more “life” and is more fun to listen to I reckon. I got the AQ cable intending to send it back if it made no improvement and I am keeping it.

Thanks for the input - much appreciated


----------



## Arniesb

sjt1970 said:


> OK Reporting back!
> 
> I moved the DAS nearer the Qutest and used the cable that came with the Qutest. There were fewer clicks. Then I discovered that there were clicks on the recording I was using to test! This is a 24/192 recording of Ladies of the Canyon by Joni Mitchell. I noticed that the clicks were always coming in the same places in the songs after I moved the DAS. For example one about 12 sec into the first song, Morning Morgantown. Then I tried an old CD rip and the same clicks were on that as well. Then I tried the different versions of the LP streamed from Qobuz – on these as well. Other recordings I have tried recently have no or very few clicks (sometimes you can’t tell if you are playing electronica because they often put click like sounds on the record itself). So I think I have eliminated most random clicks and am hearing ones on the recordings now – I think I missed them before I got the Qutest – I can only guess because the Qutest picks out details more clearly.
> 
> ...


Try different cables too! Audioquest in general have very noisy usb cables. Usb cables are very noisy and they need lot of shielding, power leg separation, great insulation.
You would be surprised how much smoother and quieter Everything can sound with different brands.
Aq make great IC, but their usb cables need revamping.


----------



## Stirrio

Hey folks,

I have a question that may have already been discussed somewhere in this long thread. Can RCA splitters (such as Audioquest) be used with the Qutest without affecting sound quality? I want to use the Qutest to feed separate IC runs to my Burson Soloist Mk II headphone amp _and_ my main Creek 4330R > KEF LS50 setup. 

I'm currently using the Audioquest splitters with a Schiit Mimby without any ill effects. Just wondered if the Qutest's output impedance and power are up to the task. Currently considering the Qutest against the Yggy, and the ability to feed two amps at once is a major deciding factor, as they Yggy has two sets of single-ended outs.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## jwbrent

Stirrio said:


> Hey folks,
> 
> I have a question that may have already been discussed somewhere in this long thread. Can RCA splitters (such as Audioquest) be used with the Qutest without affecting sound quality? I want to use the Qutest to feed separate IC runs to my Burson Soloist Mk II headphone amp _and_ my main Creek 4330R > KEF LS50 setup.
> 
> ...



I do the same thing and use Tara Labs all metal splitters to drive my headphone amp and my speaker amp. I do recall that the output impedance the Qutest sees can impact the sound if both amplifiers are powered up, so I leave one shut off. Perhaps @Rob Watts can chime in whether this last step is necessary.


----------



## Stirrio

Thanks, jwbrent. I'm hoping not to have to power down my speaker amp to listen to headphones, as I like to leave all my gear on all the time. If anyone else has experience with this, I'd love to hear it. The ability to drive two amps at once could tip me toward the Yggy.


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 5, 2020)

So its done.. i installed 2 lowZ buffer caps over the pos. and neg. 8v power feeds to the OP stage of my Qutest as u see on the bottom of the picture. I drive my HP straight out of the RCA's . The result is truly more dynamics and control over the HP's drivers. It was a puzzle to fit them in though. No more external amp for me anymore. The TT2 can wait a bit longer.


----------



## Jon L

Reactcore said:


> So its done.. i installed 2 lowZ buffer caps over the pos. and neg. 8v power feeds to the OP stage of my Qutest as u see on the bottom of the picture. I drive my HP straight out of the RCA's . The result is truly more dynamics and control over the HP's drivers. It was a puzzle to fit them in though. No more external amp for me anymore. The TT2 can wait a bit longer.



You used electrolytics caps?  What value uF, V?
Do you have photos of the board location where you soldered on the caps?  
Does it now sound different (better?) when driving an external amplifier, not headphones directly?


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 5, 2020)

Theyre 10v 3300uF but its the low z that matters most for current peaks drawn by the HP.
I made more pics yes..











I measured reversing from the RCA's to locate the components to place them. Using a external amp i dont expect improvements since that is kohms load. The Qutest already has the optimal design for that usage.


----------



## Rob Watts

jwbrent said:


> I do the same thing and use Tara Labs all metal splitters to drive my headphone amp and my speaker amp. I do recall that the output impedance the Qutest sees can impact the sound if both amplifiers are powered up, so I leave one shut off. Perhaps @Rob Watts can chime in whether this last step is necessary.



So Qutest will drive any amplifier input impedance OK. I would only get worried at 100 ohms or less - and amp inputs are many times larger than that.

But I am worried about the possibility of causing SQ troubles with turning off a connected amp. Amps have input diodes clamped to the + and - supplies for ESD and other over voltage protection. These would operate with no power and the effect of the diodes could be to degrade linearity; the effect would depend upon the input resistance on the power amp input though. So listen to it with it on or off, and go with the one that sounds closest to the SQ when the cable for the unused amp is disconnected.


----------



## shoaibexpert (Jan 6, 2020)

So I am interested in the Qutest...but obviously find it expensive...only if it does things that cheaper alternatives can do to a similar extent.

My setup is HiFiMan Arya with THX AAA 789...and currently run the Tidal HIFI source via my SMSL M500 DAC (I know cheap Chi-Fi). The M500 DAC measures incredibly well (better than the Qutest) and some folks at ASR swear that I won't hear a difference between that and the Qutest double matched... something they call 'being objectivist'...

I am 35 and live in UAE where there is no place to Demo Chord Products. My question to the experts here is simple: Do similar measuring DACs as regards SINAD and Distortion etc. sound exactly alike in listening like the theory suggests? Has anyone done a double matched A/B testing to confirm this?

And in my current setup, would getting the Qutest make a huge difference in SQ and experience...enough to justify the new acquisition? Apologies for the vague question...Many Thanks


----------



## Rob Watts

You can demo Chord at Dubai Audio - indeed I am doing a couple of events there on the 20th and 21st of this month.

As to measurements - it depends what you measure. SINAD and distortion are very simple tests and do not tell you how it sounds like at all. The ear/brain is extremely sensitive to vanishingly small errors, and these matter a great deal to the ability to enjoy music. At the end of the day you need to hear it for yourself - only you can decide with your set-up whether it works for you or not.


----------



## shoaibexpert (Jan 6, 2020)

Rob Watts said:


> You can demo Chord at Dubai Audio - indeed I am doing a couple of events there on the 20th and 21st of this month.
> 
> As to measurements - it depends what you measure. SINAD and distortion are very simple tests and do not tell you how it sounds like at all. The ear/brain is extremely sensitive to vanishingly small errors, and these matter a great deal to the ability to enjoy music. At the end of the day you need to hear it for yourself - only you can decide with your set-up whether it works for you or not.


Thanks @Rob Watts I will ask Dubai Audio then. In any case, I don't think they or Samma3a in Dubai provide sales return in case one buys and is not happy with the product. Btw where and when will you be holding the event and is it gonna be public?

As to Qutest, I like many have this question: why didn't you put a balanced out on the DAC. I do consider my Amp and Headphones to be detailed enough to benefit from the Qutest...but the lack of balanced out kinda discourages me....maybe many like me...don't know if it should though!

Thanks


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes the events at Dubai Audio will be public. I don't have the detailed times of it yet...

My DACs are innately single ended, so adding balanced will add extra circuitry, and hence degrade transparency. This is the reverse of other DACs - they have to be balanced, as it's impossible to remove common mode noise from the chip substrate unless you go differential (balanced).


----------



## Stirrio

Rob Watts said:


> So Qutest will drive any amplifier input impedance OK. I would only get worried at 100 ohms or less - and amp inputs are many times larger than that.
> 
> But I am worried about the possibility of causing SQ troubles with turning off a connected amp. Amps have input diodes clamped to the + and - supplies for ESD and other over voltage protection. These would operate with no power and the effect of the diodes could be to degrade linearity; the effect would depend upon the input resistance on the power amp input though. So listen to it with it on or off, and go with the one that sounds closest to the SQ when the cable for the unused amp is disconnected.



Thanks, @Rob Watts. I gather from this that I can use my Audioquest splitters to feed my headphone amp and speaker amp, probably leave both amps on all the time, and not worry about it. This helps a lot in my decision vs the Yggy!


----------



## shoaibexpert

Rob Watts said:


> Yes the events at Dubai Audio will be public. I don't have the detailed times of it yet...
> 
> My DACs are innately single ended, so adding balanced will add extra circuitry, and hence degrade transparency. This is the reverse of other DACs - they have to be balanced, as it's impossible to remove common mode noise from the chip substrate unless you go differential (balanced).


Thanks for clarifying @Rob Watts


----------



## officerdibble

Is it safe to use the Allo Shanti power supply with the Qutest? It outputs either 5v / 1a or 5v / 3a.


----------



## rodee13

officerdibble said:


> Is it safe to use the Allo Shanti power supply with the Qutest? It outputs either 5v / 1a or 5v / 3a.



I am using Shanti 1a to power Qutest and 3a to power Usbridge Signature, sounds fine to me.


----------



## mvule

Hi all, just joined the Qutest club!
Not something I thought I'd ever do...


----------



## marcmccalmont

I finally took a friends advice and traded my Hugo2 for a Qutest (I have a preamp in my system) He optimized the performance with a short lifatec optical cable, MCRU linear power supply and a short blue jeans cable lc1 ultra low capacitance interconnect. All I can say is it keeps up with my DAVE ...... really well done! As far as a headphone amp the new Asgard 3 is exceptional. This combination is keeping up with DAVE truly a bargain


----------



## daredevil_kk

marcmccalmont said:


> I finally took a friends advice and traded my Hugo2 for a Qutest (I have a preamp in my system) He optimized the performance with a short lifatec optical cable, MCRU linear power supply and a short blue jeans cable lc1 ultra low capacitance interconnect. All I can say is it keeps up with my DAVE ...... really well done! As far as a headphone amp the new Asgard 3 is exceptional. This combination is keeping up with DAVE truly a bargain


Glad you like it, and yes it is DAVE on the cheap.


----------



## Reactcore

marcmccalmont said:


> I finally took a friends advice and traded my Hugo2 for a Qutest (I have a preamp in my system) He optimized the performance with a short lifatec optical cable, MCRU linear power supply and a short blue jeans cable lc1 ultra low capacitance interconnect. All I can say is it keeps up with my DAVE ...... really well done! As far as a headphone amp the new Asgard 3 is exceptional. This combination is keeping up with DAVE truly a bargain



If u use HP b sure u try direct drive witout amp


----------



## mvule

Loving the sound of the Qutest, connected to a Violectric V281 via an Audioquest Big Sur cable. 
Headphones are HD 600.


----------



## mvule

Curious thing, having been used to using the balanced headphone socket from the V281, it just didn't work for my taste with the Qutest. 
Popped the HD 600 into single ended mode and it sounded fine.
Anyone else had a similar experience?


----------



## Richardhoos

Seeking input on music endpoint source, if anyone has any thoughts to share ...

I’m currently enjoying my Qutest with ZMF Verite headphones and a HeadAmp GSX-Mini amplifier. I love this set-up. I’m listening from my iPhone with the camera adapter and an audio quest cinnamon usb cord. (Streaming hi res qobuz) ...

My question is: Is there any sound benefit to using, eg a digital audio player, as opposed to the iPhone? 

thanks listeners!
Rich


----------



## NA Blur

I’ve always wanted to listen to see measurements for the Chord Qutest.


----------



## mvule

Richardhoos said:


> Seeking input on music endpoint source, if anyone has any thoughts to share ...
> 
> I’m currently enjoying my Qutest with ZMF Verite headphones and a HeadAmp GSX-Mini amplifier. I love this set-up. I’m listening from my iPhone with the camera adapter and an audio quest cinnamon usb cord. (Streaming hi res qobuz) ...
> 
> ...



In my experience the quality of whatever you store your music on, does matter.
The difference I heard was timing.


----------



## Jon L

NA Blur said:


> I’ve always wanted to listen to see measurements for the Chord Qutest.



Well, here are Chord Qutest measurements..
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-and-measurements-of-chord-qutest-dac.5981/


----------



## Triode User

Jon L said:


> Well, here are Chord Qutest measurements..
> https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-and-measurements-of-chord-qutest-dac.5981/



It measures just about the best he has ever tested and yet Amir is still mealy mouthed about it and wonders why it doesn’t use a standard chip. Perhaps he ought to listen to it to find out why!


----------



## shoaibexpert

Triode User said:


> It measures just about the best he has ever tested and yet Amir is still mealy mouthed about it and wonders why it doesn’t use a standard chip. Perhaps he ought to listen to it to find out why!


Maybe he mouthed about as he didn't feel that such performance should be this expensive, given most Chinese DACs easily surpass the Qutest at a fraction of the price nowadays e.g. SMSL M500 or the D90! Off course the premise is that all similar measuring DACs should ideally sound the same as they are only converting 1/0s to Analogue signal and the output stage issues are well covered in those measurements. Personally,I have yet to hear the Qutest to understand if that's true...


----------



## Triode User

shoaibexpert said:


> Maybe he mouthed about as he didn't feel that such performance should be this expensive, given most Chinese DACs easily surpass the Qutest at a fraction of the price nowadays e.g. SMSL M500 or the D90! Off course the premise is that all similar measuring DACs should ideally sound the same as they are only converting 1/0s to Analogue signal and the output stage issues are well covered in those measurements. Personally,I have yet to hear the Qutest to understand if that's true...



if the measurements done by ASR were all that mattered then the Qutest and others would sound the same as Dave and yet . . . . . . .


----------



## plsvn

yeah, it's just 1s and 0s: nothing else!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hey guys,any speaker user here that uses some kind of low frequency equalization that doesn't affect sound quality?A digital one for example?


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> if the measurements done by ASR were all that mattered then the Qutest and others would sound the same as Dave and yet . . . . . . .


Measurements show potential it seems.
Like low end thx amps... Massive resolution yet sound thin. Benchmark better implementation hpa4 didnt sound thin according to many.
Low end chord dacs like hugo and qutest sound thin too unlike Dave which sound natural and much more resolving.


----------



## shoaibexpert

I just wish we had measurements for how resolving a DAC was...could have saved people a lot of money if it could be proven that D/A conversion from a clean DAC...all sound the same! Maybe there is something...


----------



## Jon L (Jan 20, 2020)

shoaibexpert said:


> Maybe he mouthed about as he didn't feel that such performance should be this expensive, given most Chinese DACs easily surpass the Qutest at a fraction of the price nowadays e.g. SMSL M500 or the D90!



"Easily surpass" in what way?  Most of us don't have a dog in the race or own Chord stocks and would LOVE to pick up a Chi-Fi DAC that sounds just as good as Qutest at a "fraction" of the price.
SINAD and distortion graphs are nice to look at but do not tell you how something will actually sound to your ears when you hook it up to your complicated system milieu (including all cable choices, power choices, etc). 
I need another DAC for a second system and was looking at the new Topping D90, but it's $700 which is no longer chump change.  I'm sure nice measurement graphs will come out soon, but I will still not know how it will SOUND 

*Edit*  
Yup, I see the D90 measurements are already published and are superb.  My dilemma remains the same...


----------



## ecwl

shoaibexpert said:


> I just wish we had measurements for how resolving a DAC was...could have saved people a lot of money if it could be proven that D/A conversion from a clean DAC...all sound the same! Maybe there is something...


This is complicated for a number of reasons:
1) some things are measurable and affect sound quality but it’s frequently not measured, e.g. jitter in the old days and noise floor modulation nowadays
2) some things are not measurable but is mathematically provable and affects sound quality, e.g. upsampling/oversampling filters, ASRC, digital noise shaper performances below -180dB
3) people don’t agree on whether something that is measurable or mathematically different but unmeasurable truly affect sound quality
4) some people like distortions, especially euphonic ones
5) some recordings are so bad that they almost always sound better with euphonic distortion
I think Chord DAC philosophy is to minimize distortions that they believe are audible and to not introduce euphonic distortions. 

My take is that we spend our money where we want. If we buy a gear and put into our system and appreciate the sound compared to our previous gear, who am I to judge?
I can argue one DAC has less measureable distortions than another. Or I can say one DAC has less noise floor modulation, lower noise digital noise shaper, or longer tap length upsampling filter that more closely mimics the sinc function. These are facts. But if you don’t think these things are audible or reduce audible distortion and if you find another DAC more euphonic, there’s really not much more to say beyond that.


----------



## shoaibexpert

ecwl said:


> This is complicated for a number of reasons:
> 1) some things are measurable and affect sound quality but it’s frequently not measured, e.g. jitter in the old days and noise floor modulation nowadays
> 2) some things are not measurable but is mathematically provable and affects sound quality, e.g. upsampling/oversampling filters, ASRC, digital noise shaper performances below -180dB
> 3) people don’t agree on whether something that is measurable or mathematically different but unmeasurable truly affect sound quality
> ...


I think everything apart from 'lower noise digital shaper' is being measured at Audiosciencerevew. Their philosophy is simple: a D/A converter is supposed to draw an analog signal from digitally processed files...as cleanly as possible and as without coloration or degradation as possible. They measure quite a few things there...how directly related these things are to how a DAC sounds and if they are missing out on any key measurements is not known to me. 

But my premise is this: all DACs which do not add any color or distortion or change the signal in any way, are clean...should sound the same theoretically! Now I know they don't...but really don't know why?


----------



## ecwl

shoaibexpert said:


> I think everything apart from 'lower noise digital shaper' is being measured at Audiosciencerevew. Their philosophy is simple: a D/A converter is supposed to draw an analog signal from digitally processed files...as cleanly as possible and as without coloration or degradation as possible. They measure quite a few things there...how directly related these things are to how a DAC sounds and if they are missing out on any key measurements is not known to me.
> 
> But my premise is this: all DACs which do not add any color or distortion or change the signal in any way, are clean...should sound the same theoretically! Now I know they don't...but really don't know why?


Hmmm... Audioscience review does not measure
1) Noise floor modulation (as in noise floor with no signal vs noise floor with a signal)
2) Digital filter in the sense that you can have two digital filters with the same frequency response and distortion based on the Audio science review measurements but they are still not mathematically identical because that is a static measurement and not a dynamic computation of the filter with musical material. Although I guess you can argue that they do run the filter through an impulse response to see the ringing so you can argue that measurement represents the filter except nobody really understands how to interpret the ringing because impulse response is really an illegal signal that is not bandwidth limited and you see people online arguing whether having pre-ringing is good or bad, but never how closely the filter is to the sinc function, probably because other designers don’t think it matters. On the other hand, I just heard a quote that “people try not to understand something if their income depends on not understanding it”. If other DAC designers cannot program FPGAs with long tap lengths to mimic the sinc function, they’re going to say that using long tap lengths to mimic the sinc function for digital filtering does not matter.

I think Rob Watts has addressed this issue that even puzzles him when he was designing his DACs. He has said that first of all, the noise floor for almost all decent DACs should be below audibility levels but noise floor modulation in non-Chord DACs are highly audible even if the noise floor itself is always below our current understanding of the threshold of audibility. Second, the closer the digital filter can approximate the sinc function, the better reconstruction of transients. Third, he found that there is a huge difference when his digital noise shaper went from -220dB to -360dB even though once again, he doesn’t think these noise shapers are obviously performing way beyond the threshold of audibility. Unfortunately, we have no way to verify his findings ourselves because at least I don’t know how to build DACs like he does so that I can do these AB/ABX listening experiments.

Ultimately, my take is that we are still missing something and that we don’t fully comprehend what our true threshold of audibility is. Or alternatively, by optimizing these parameters, Rob Watts is changing the final analog output of the DACs which is within our known thresholds of audibility. But of course, if that were true, as you said, Audioscience review or other measurements should be able to detect this. My take on these issues is that we don’t know what we don’t know. Or I am crazy and there is no difference and I just wasted my money. But if that were true, it’s still my money. We all waste our money on silly stuff that we like. As long as we are having fun, no harm no foul.


----------



## linearly

ecwl said:


> Or I am crazy and there is no difference and I just wasted my money. But if that were true, it’s still my money. We all waste our money on silly stuff that we like. As long as we are having fun, no harm no foul.




You did not waste your money, I did. Because I trusted others on what they say about measurments and not my ears. Chord DAC's are so much better then any other Delta Sigma DAC out there, and believe me I've spent a fortune on different designs. And never was happy on how they sound.

But the question remains, what are we looking for in a DAC? For me this question is simple. It has to be musical and detailed without being harsh. And Chord delivers on this. They say we should do blind tests, level matched, but thats so much effort for something obvious. The difference is there and noticable right away, you have to make an effort not to hear it, for whatever reason. 

Again they say we have some kind of bias when we listen to anything, and the most expensive thing should sound the best. Thats not what I've found. My 40 euro's sound card to my ears is better then any other expensive DAC's I had (not Chord). Same experience I had with cables. Expensive ones sounding bad. In the end we have to trust our ears, because we listen to music not measurments. And in my experience what measures well does not always sound good.

Chord DAC's have this uncanny ability to pull you into the music, like the artist is there into the room with you, that I was not able to hear on any other Delta Sigma DAC I had. Regardless on how good they measure or how expensive they were. I like to compare this with an old CRT tv vs a modern 4k tv. While watching some breath taking landscape on the CRT you just watch it, like with Delta Sigma DAC, but with the 4k tv the landscape takes your breath away and you start to 'feel' it as you are there, like with Chord DAC's. 

Now, I said Delta Sigma DAC's a lot. Personally I've yet to find a design that I like, no matter the company. And I'm done searching. So if Chord sounds so good why not a DAC from them? In the past I owned the DAVE but unfortunately life happens and I had to sell it. So until I gather funds for another one I have to make do with something else. And thats hard mind you for anyone that knows the DAVE.

So in my search for a decent DAC I've stumbled upon some youtube sound demo's testing different designs, with an R2R DAC aswell. No surprise from the Delta Sigma ones, but the R2R came as a shock. I had this preconception that R2R's measure bad, they must sound bad, and that they are veiled with no details. But that was not the case in the video.

Of course I had to test it myself and what other way to do it then buying another DAC... An R2R one this time. What do I have to lose. There are a lot of designs, fortunately someone on a forum made a list and it was easy for me to pick the cheapest one to try.

I went with the Pro-Ject DAC Box S FL thats about 200 euro's, figured thats not much to test a new technology. And frankly there wasn't much to test. They say R2R DAC's need burn in at start, but it sounded amazing right out of the box. Everything that I didn't like about Delta Sigma was gone here. With every Delta Sigma DAC you make a compromise. Either its veiled and to warm sounding, or its detailed and harsh, sounds thin or congested, there are compromises to be made. But NOT with R2R. With R2R music is just there, not harsh, not veiled, not thin, everything is perfectly balanced. 

If I have to use a word to describe R2R sound is 'effortless'. I've yet to find a song that sounds bad with R2R, everything sounds musical, makes you tap your feet and enjoy music. And for me that's all its about. Not measurments or what others say on different forums. Does it pull you into the music like Chord? No it does not. But it makes you enjoy music like Chord and for me thats all that matters. Of course with more expensive R2R designs sound can get better (I hope), but for now I'm happy with what I've got until another DAVE.

So in conclusion (this is my personal opinion and in this hobby everyone has theirs) but Chord is better then my R2R DAC that is MUCH better then any Delta Sigma design I had, regardless of measurments.


----------



## Arniesb

linearly said:


> You did not waste your money, I did. Because I trusted others on what they say about measurments and not my ears. Chord DAC's are so much better then any other Delta Sigma DAC out there, and believe me I've spent a fortune on different designs. And never was happy on how they sound.
> 
> But the question remains, what are we looking for in a DAC? For me this question is simple. It has to be musical and detailed without being harsh. And Chord delivers on this. They say we should do blind tests, level matched, but thats so much effort for something obvious. The difference is there and noticable right away, you have to make an effort not to hear it, for whatever reason.
> 
> ...


Lol. No one will take fanboy opinion seriously.


----------



## linearly

Arniesb said:


> Lol. No one will take fanboy opinion seriously.



So if someone doesn't share your opinion lets just call him a fanboy and call it a day. If you believe that then you didn't understand what I had to say. I fanboy with my ears, I'm a fanboy of my ASUS Xonar AE that has an ESS chip (delta sigma) that sounds to me much better then any Chi-fi DAC I've heard (with perfect measurments). Sure I'm a fanboy of Pro-Ject that they make this wonderful and cheap R2R DAC, the first I tried and its amazing (to me). And also don't forget I'm a huge Chord fanboy that currently I don't own any of their products. 

Anyways at the end of the day everyone is a fanboy to someone, its called brand trust, and I rather buy something from someone I know makes great products, then take my chance with obscure products and companies that end up breaking or not working at all.


----------



## GreenBow

shoaibexpert said:


> So I am interested in the Qutest...but obviously find it expensive...only if it does things that cheaper alternatives can do to a similar extent.
> 
> My setup is HiFiMan Arya with THX AAA 789...and currently run the Tidal HIFI source via my SMSL M500 DAC (I know cheap Chi-Fi). The M500 DAC measures incredibly well (better than the Qutest) and some folks at ASR swear that I won't hear a difference between that and the Qutest double matched... something they call 'being objectivist'...
> 
> ...



There is the 2Qute, which was the predecessor to the Qutest.

However I would strongly recommend the Qutest if you can make your budget do that. The Qutest is a clearly better product than the 2Qute, but that doesn't mean the 2Qute was weak. It means that the Qutest is a fantastic product. Honestly, if you want the Qutest, don't worry - buy with confidence.


----------



## GreenBow

Rob Watts said:


> Yes the events at Dubai Audio will be public. I don't have the detailed times of it yet...
> 
> My DACs are innately single ended, so adding balanced will add extra circuitry, and hence degrade transparency. This is the reverse of other DACs - they have to be balanced, as it's impossible to remove common mode noise from the chip substrate unless you go differential (balanced).



Badda-bing badda-boom. The definitive reason why Chord DACs don't have balanced, straight from the horse's mouth.

Many of have seen this before, and tried repeating for others who have asked. Never clearer than this post though.


----------



## GreenBow

Was just having a 'wish my Qutest had remote control' moment.


----------



## danypel

How are you. I have a Qutest for more than a week. I use it with a Node 2 with optical output. I find it difficult to hear differences in sounds between the analog output of the Bluesound and the Qutest. Is that normal, or maybe I am somewhat deaf?


----------



## ecwl

danypel said:


> How are you. I have a Qutest for more than a week. I use it with a Node 2 with optical output. I find it difficult to hear differences in sounds between the analog output of the Bluesound and the Qutest. Is that normal, or maybe I am somewhat deaf?


What is the downstream gear you’re using after Bluesound or Qutest? For example, if you pair it with a class D amplifier, a lot of the benefits from the Qutest would be lost. Different preamplifiers and amplifiers also have different degrees of transparency. Also try to make sure Qutest is in green filter mode. I have personally listened to a Bluesound DAC connected to Parasound preamp and amp and then I directly connected Mojo to the Parasound amp and the difference is very clear cut.


----------



## danypel

ecwl said:


> What is the downstream gear you’re using after Bluesound or Qutest? For example, if you pair it with a class D amplifier, a lot of the benefits from the Qutest would be lost. Different preamplifiers and amplifiers also have different degrees of transparency. Also try to make sure Qutest is in green filter mode. I have personally listened to a Bluesound DAC connected to Parasound preamp and amp and then I directly connected Mojo to the Parasound amp and the difference is very clear cut.



My setup: Schiit Freya preamp, Mc2205 power amp and Revel f208 speakers


----------



## Victorr

danypel said:


> How are you. I have a Qutest for more than a week. I use it with a Node 2 with optical output. I find it difficult to hear differences in sounds between the analog output of the Bluesound and the Qutest. Is that normal, or maybe I am somewhat deaf?



Try listening to Qutest for a week, and then switch to Node 2. Perhaps then you will clearly hear the difference.
In addition, the tube preamplifier has a high level of distortion, so it can completely level the difference in sound quality


----------



## ecwl

danypel said:


> My setup: Schiit Freya preamp, Mc2205 power amp and Revel f208 speakers


You have a great system so it's hard to know. It's possible that the tube of the Schiit Freya homogenized the sound sufficiently that it's harder to hear the sonic differences.
I would suggest just listening for a little longer to see if you enjoy the difference. If not, kudos to you as you'll save some money on the Qutest.


----------



## danypel

Thank you very much for the answers. I will listen to it for a while, and as you say later I will switch to the analogue output of Node 2. It may also be a matter of expectations, and that I have expected the change to be day and night.


----------



## HumanMedia (Jan 25, 2020)

Review of D50s at Audio Bacon, and compares it to a Qutest.
https://audiobacon.net/2019/12/24/topping-d50s-dac-review/


----------



## linearly

HumanMedia said:


> Review of D50s at Audio Bacon, and compares it to a Qutest.
> https://audiobacon.net/2019/12/24/topping-d50s-dac-review/



This review is well written and mirrors my findings with other delta sigma dac's I had compared to Chord or r2r. There is a sound demo on youtube if you search 'Topping D50 and Chord Mojo', the difference is clear to me and if you can't hear it then you are lucky. There is also a chance some prefer harshness (gives a sense of false clarity) because everyone has different tastes in music. And that's fine.



GreenBow said:


> Was just having a 'wish my Qutest had remote control' moment.



Add a headphone out and where can I buy it from? Wish there was a true table top (no batteries) mid range dac from Chord with hp socket, the only option now is tt2 or DAVE.


----------



## malazz123

HumanMedia said:


> Review of D50s at Audio Bacon, and compares it to a Qutest.
> https://audiobacon.net/2019/12/24/topping-d50s-dac-review/



"The only thing that makes sense is to trust your own ears" <<== this
i have D70 , mojo and ifi micro bl and good old marantz hd dac1 , with amps ;schiit valhala 2 , massdrop thx 789 and cayin Ha1a mk2

love all of them , different music needs different gear setup and i don;t mind it;s my "me time" 

but if i got chance to get qutest , i would trade/sell my mojo


----------



## GreenBow (Jan 26, 2020)

linearly said:


> Add a headphone out and where can I buy it from? Wish there was a true table top (no batteries) mid range dac from Chord with hp socket, the only option now is tt2 or DAVE.



I think a lot of folk would like that hypothetical Chord DAC.

I initially bought the Hugo 2. Am actually glad it's portable or rather movable about the home easily. However if there was a headphone port Qutest, I imagine I would not have bought the Hugo 2. I think the best option would be a Qutest with a headphone port and some supercaps. That would dominate desktop use, and double up for hifi use. It would be pricey though.


----------



## danypel

How about ... I wanted to tell you that after 4 or 5 days of intensive listening and leaving the Qutest working 24 hours a day the sound has changed significantly. Now I notice clear differences between the integrated dac of Node 2 and that of Qutest. Being the latter much more detailed, sound more open and airy, more dynamic ... well, everything has improved so much that I can not stop listening to music through Roon. I also have it connected to an endpoint consisting of a basic notebook with very low-resource ssd and it works very well. I find it difficult to find differences between the Node 2 with optical connection and the notebook with USB connection. Thank you and sorry for my English that is not my native language.


----------



## Triode User

danypel said:


> How about ... I wanted to tell you that after 4 or 5 days of intensive listening and leaving the Qutest working 24 hours a day the sound has changed significantly. Now I notice clear differences between the integrated dac of Node 2 and that of Qutest. Being the latter much more detailed, sound more open and airy, more dynamic ... well, everything has improved so much that I can not stop listening to music through Roon. I also have it connected to an endpoint consisting of a basic notebook with very low-resource ssd and it works very well. I find it difficult to find differences between the Node 2 with optical connection and the notebook with USB connection. Thank you and sorry for my English that is not my native language.



there is no need to apologise for your English, it is very good. 

I suspect it is your brain rather than the Qutest that has changed in the time that you have had it and it is this that is enabling you to now hear the differences. I have never had any Chord dac which has changed its sound with ‘burn in’. 

I was rather surprised that you couldn’t hear differences between the qutest and node 2 but you got there in the end!


----------



## linearly

GreenBow said:


> I think the best option would be a Qutest with a headphone port and some supercaps. That would dominate desktop use, and double up for hifi use. It would be pricey though.



There is a gap to be filled in the best entry level all in one desktop dac/amp (not many can afford a tt2 to start with) since other companies struggle to create a balance between a good dac and a transparent amp in one package. But that's easy for Chord to do with their direct dac to headphones drive. 

Some folk modded their Mojo with supercaps, so thats also a possibility. Of course you lose warranty but I'd do it if I had the technical know-how. Maybe we can get official supercaps mods for Mojo or Hugo2, or better get a Mojo and Hugo2 supercap versions, I'd buy both of them right away since that would solve all my issues I have.


----------



## danypel

Triode User said:


> there is no need to apologise for your English, it is very good.
> 
> I suspect it is your brain rather than the Qutest that has changed in the time that you have had it and it is this that is enabling you to now hear the differences. I have never had any Chord dac which has changed its sound with ‘burn in’.
> 
> I was rather surprised that you couldn’t hear differences between the qutest and node 2 but you got there in the end!



Thanks for your answer. Trying the different gain options again, I realized that with 3v it sounds much better than with 1v and 2v. I think that was the main difference between my first listeners and the last ones that have been so different. Obviously my preamp (Schiit Freya) needs higher input voltage. The difference is very clear when I change the gain. The sound is much more open, more dynamic. But at 2v I still don't notice big differences with Node 2. I am convinced that in my case the adequate gain is that of 3v. Regards!!!!


----------



## ecwl

danypel said:


> Thanks for your answer. Trying the different gain options again, I realized that with 3v it sounds much better than with 1v and 2v. I think that was the main difference between my first listeners and the last ones that have been so different. Obviously my preamp (Schiit Freya) needs higher input voltage. The difference is very clear when I change the gain. The sound is much more open, more dynamic. But at 2v I still don't notice big differences with Node 2. I am convinced that in my case the adequate gain is that of 3v. Regards!!!!


This is most interesting because 3V vs 2V is a 4dB difference so the SNR of the Qutest would not be dramatically reduced. So my personal speculation is this: Freya volume control is more transparent at a lower volume setting. By operating the Qutest at 3V, you’re letting the Freya volume to be set at 4dB lower and most preamplifiers have optimal volumes where you get the best linearity and lowest noise which results in most transparency. I suspect that’s the most likely reason why it’s easier for you now to hear the benefits of Qutest.
That said, I definitely have a couple of friends whose preamplifiers would clip if you feed a 3V input which is why the 2V and 1V options are there.


----------



## danypel

ecwl said:


> This is most interesting because 3V vs 2V is a 4dB difference so the SNR of the Qutest would not be dramatically reduced. So my personal speculation is this: Freya volume control is more transparent at a lower volume setting. By operating the Qutest at 3V, you’re letting the Freya volume to be set at 4dB lower and most preamplifiers have optimal volumes where you get the best linearity and lowest noise which results in most transparency. I suspect that’s the most likely reason why it’s easier for you now to hear the benefits of Qutest.
> That said, I definitely have a couple of friends whose preamplifiers would clip if you feed a 3V input which is why the 2V and 1V options are there.



Very interesting your explanation and really very reasonable. The difference between Node 2 and Qutest is very clear when the Chord is set to 3v. Not so when it is in 2v where I find it difficult to find the differences, the sound is more anemic and congested. Now, the striking thing is that the output of Node 2 is 2v (or at least when the Qutest is set to 2v the volume seems level) and it could be that then that also makes the Bluesound not sound quite right with the Freya, and not so much the difference in quality of both dacs ... I hope you understand what I mean. Thank you.


----------



## Richardhoos

I have a new (well used but new to me) Lumin U1 Mini headed my way that I’m excited about. 

For those use use Qutest fed by Lumin U1 mini, is USB the best way to go? I exclusively stream Qobuz at this point.

thanks for your input! 
Rich


----------



## plsvn (Jan 29, 2020)

Richardhoos said:


> For those use use Qutest fed by Lumin U1 mini, is USB the best way to go? I exclusively stream Qobuz at this point.



Lumin's advice is to always try AES first, but since the Qutest has no AES in...


----------



## 521994 (Feb 1, 2020)

Hello to the chord qutest owners. I came across a very strange problem with my qutest and your assistance will be appreciated and @Rob Watts might be able to help. I just bought a chord qutest and I am impressed. Nevertheless I came across a very strange situation. I have the dac connected to my pc, tv and cd transport using Bnc 1 for the cd transport, optical for tv and usb for mac. I am using chord clearway cables and for the cd transport is clearway digital RCA to BNC. When I am using the BNC 1 for my cd transport every time I switch on or off any electrical device or lights at home the dac pauses for just a fraction of time (les than a second). With usb and optical works fine. I tried a battery I have to power the dac but still the same. Whenever I switch on or off any lights at home I get the pause. To make it even stranger I changed the digital coaxial cable to an audio quest digital RCA coaxial with a BNC adapter and works perfectly fine. No pauses no matter what input I use. Any idea what might be causing this problem when the selected input is BNC 1 or 2 and with chord clearway digital RCA/BNC cable?


----------



## Rob Watts

You are having SPDIF locking problems and it's down to the design of the cable, inducing noise into the SPDIF receiver when electrical transients are happening. So stick with the Audioquest cable...


----------



## 521994

Thanks @Rob Watts I will stick with the audio quest and return the chord cable cause wasn’t cheap.


----------



## danypel

I ask: can there be so much difference in sound between the gain of 3v compared to that of 2v?  with 2v I really notice it lifeless, anemic.  With 3v the differences are very noticeable.  I am using a Schiit Freya preamp and a Macintosh mc2205 power amp.  I would appreciate Rob Watts if I could answer this question.  Thanks a lot!


----------



## snatex

ecwl said:


> This is most interesting because 3V vs 2V is a 4dB difference so the SNR of the Qutest would not be dramatically reduced. So my personal speculation is this: Freya volume control is more transparent at a lower volume setting. By operating the Qutest at 3V, you’re letting the Freya volume to be set at 4dB lower and most preamplifiers have optimal volumes where you get the best linearity and lowest noise which results in most transparency. I suspect that’s the most likely reason why it’s easier for you now to hear the benefits of Qutest.
> That said, I definitely have a couple of friends whose preamplifiers would clip if you feed a 3V input which is why the 2V and 1V options are there.



I find this discussion very interesting. In theory, an underpowered signal might sound less dynamic than one supported by more power.

I have the choice of 1,2 or 3V on the Qutest and 0, +6, +12 and +14db pre-gain on my power amp which further complicates the decision in choosing the optimal settings.

I’ve asked @robwatts his thoughts on increasing the power of the Qutest vs increasing the power of the amp and he basically said he didn’t think the Qutest had an optimal voltage setting so it really didn’t matter.

I also asked Fried Reim, the amp designer, and he thought increasing the pre-gain On the amp was preferable because it was effortless and that pushing the voltage on the Qutest was more likely to be an issue.


----------



## Rob Watts

There is no significant difference between 2v and 3v from Qutest POV as the 3v setting is still well below what the DAC could be capable of from the analogue side. So if you are hearing changes, it's down to the pre-amp or the power amp.


----------



## danypel

[QUOTE = "Rob Watts, publicación: 15450367, miembro: 394072"]
No hay una diferencia significativa entre 2v y 3v de Qutest POV ya que la configuración de 3v todavía está muy por debajo de lo que el DAC podría ser capaz de hacer desde el lado analógico. Entonces, si está escuchando cambios, se debe al preamplificador o al amplificador de potencia.
[/ CITAR]

Thank you very much Rob.  Maybe the preamp needs at least 3v to be properly excited.  What is strange to me is that in general the sources such as CD players, streamers, etc. have 2v outputs.  But in the audio these strange things happen and difficult to understand.  Regards!


----------



## GreenBow

I thought it would best to use the 3V output from the Qutest if you can. That way more of your signal in the transducer is clean with low noise floor from Chord. More Chord DAC and less amp, can only be a good thing. That is unless it means running the amp very low, because some amps can be a bit lifeless at low volumes. Or so I have read. I never had that problem myself, and often run an amp on whisper quiet volume.

In fact with my TT2 I use less power/volume driving speakers directly from it, than TT2 line-level out. Keeps the TT2 cooler too, which I totally love.


----------



## sjt1970

Up until last night I had my Qutest set to 2v going into an analogue input of my Naim 272 preamp. Prompted by the recent comments I tried setting the Qutest volume to 3v (blue) and I am sure it sounds better! It doesn't seem much louder but it seems to have more space, atmosphere and dynamics. Anyway it sounds great and I am happy about this!


----------



## Reactcore

Now had some listening time to my buffer capped Qutest.. see my earlier post for pics. i can report that the difference is noticable specially in the bass region as expected actually. It drives my HP directly with more authority like the TT. I have no regrets placing them


----------



## GreenBow

sjt1970 said:


> Up until last night I had my Qutest set to 2v going into an analogue input of my Naim 272 preamp. Prompted by the recent comments I tried setting the Qutest volume to 3v (blue) and I am sure it sounds better! It doesn't seem much louder but it seems to have more space, atmosphere and dynamics. Anyway it sounds great and I am happy about this!



I remember on reviews of the M-Scaler, both amateur and pro-reviews, some said even in bypass mode music sounded better. Meaning when the M-Scaler was off and just passing the sound through, people noted an improvement.

Anyway Rob Watts dispelled this notion by telling us what was happening. He said there is a small increase in volume with M-Scaler in bypass. Might have been something like 1 dB.


----------



## David M H

ecwl said:


> ... if you pair it with a class D amplifier, a lot of the benefits from the Qutest would be lost.



Could you please explain why this is?  Which class of power amp is required to reap most benefits from Qutest? 

For years I've enjoyed my 2Qute (through an MFA passive preamp) with Ncore NC400 class D power amps.  I listen to 95% classical music so enjoy the 'cleanliness' of the system.  I'm not looking for euphonic distortion. 

I've just ordered a Qutest, (looking forward to trying the 1V output option with my MFA to minimise attenuation) so I'm reading through this excellent thread for some education. Thanks in advance for your help.

JRiver->2Qute->MFA->Ncore->Audiovector


----------



## ecwl

David M H said:


> Could you please explain why this is?  Which class of power amp is required to reap most benefits from Qutest?
> 
> For years I've enjoyed my 2Qute (through an MFA passive preamp) with Ncore NC400 class D power amps.  I listen to 95% classical music so enjoy the 'cleanliness' of the system.  I'm not looking for euphonic distortion.
> 
> ...


There are many reasons why Chord DACs sound great. But two of the basics are that first, the original 44.1kHz recording is upsampled to 705.6kHz with greater accuracy for analog reconstruction than other DACs. Afterwards this 705.6kHz signal is further upsampled to 10-elements at 104MHz so that the ultra-high-frequency switching can reconstruct the analog signal as faithfully as possible. By using such a high sampling rate, it allows for Chord DACs to reconstruct transients (loud and soft) much more accurately.
The problem with Class D amplifier is that they operate usually in the 450kHz-500kHz range. So the Class D amplifier switching frequency is not very high and is significantly lower than the WTA filter upsampling rate and the switching frequency of the pulse array DAC elements. As a result, the more accurate transient analog waveforms coming out of Chord DACs would be slightly distorted in the time domain by the Class D amplifier leading to transients that are not as accurately as the Chord DACs can provide.
There is no doubt in my mind that nCore is the best Class D amplifiers out there. If you're going to use a class D amplifier, I think nCore is definitely the way to go as it is the most neutral and beautiful sounding class D amplifiers out there. However, if you are to pair a Chord DAC with a neutral class A or AB amplifier, you will find that you can hear improved timbre and transient accuracy that you didn't realize your DAC is capable of. From my end, I think amplifiers such as Benchmark AHB2, Bryston latest generation of cubed amplifiers and Chord's own Etude and Ultima amplifiers would fit the bill for people looking for neutral sounding amplifiers that can show off the Chord DACs even more. That said, there are many other reasons why people want to use nCore amplifiers and ultimately, if that's what you like and want to settle on, you'll still get more out of your Qutest for sure.


----------



## David M H

ecwl said:


> There are many reasons why Chord DACs sound great. But two of the basics are that first, the original 44.1kHz recording is upsampled to 705.6kHz with greater accuracy for analog reconstruction than other DACs. Afterwards this 705.6kHz signal is further upsampled to 10-elements at 104MHz so that the ultra-high-frequency switching can reconstruct the analog signal as faithfully as possible. By using such a high sampling rate, it allows for Chord DACs to reconstruct transients (loud and soft) much more accurately.
> The problem with Class D amplifier is that they operate usually in the 450kHz-500kHz range. So the Class D amplifier switching frequency is not very high and is significantly lower than the WTA filter upsampling rate and the switching frequency of the pulse array DAC elements. As a result, the more accurate transient analog waveforms coming out of Chord DACs would be slightly distorted in the time domain by the Class D amplifier leading to transients that are not as accurately as the Chord DACs can provide.
> There is no doubt in my mind that nCore is the best Class D amplifiers out there. If you're going to use a class D amplifier, I think nCore is definitely the way to go as it is the most neutral and beautiful sounding class D amplifiers out there. However, if you are to pair a Chord DAC with a neutral class A or AB amplifier, you will find that you can hear improved timbre and transient accuracy that you didn't realize your DAC is capable of. From my end, I think amplifiers such as Benchmark AHB2, Bryston latest generation of cubed amplifiers and Chord's own Etude and Ultima amplifiers would fit the bill for people looking for neutral sounding amplifiers that can show off the Chord DACs even more. That said, there are many other reasons why people want to use nCore amplifiers and ultimately, if that's what you like and want to settle on, you'll still get more out of your Qutest for sure.



Thank you very much for your comprehensive and informative reply. I'll start auditioning other amps once I have the Qutest installed.

I also run the 2Qute into a Trilogy class A HP amp driving HD800, a combination that also sounds great to me. But I note Rob Watts saying that's not ideal either. Maybe I'm confusing the issue. Maybe that's more to do with missing the benefit of integration of DAC and HP amp in one product. Perhaps I should have just bought a Hugo 2!


----------



## ecwl

David M H said:


> Thank you very much for your comprehensive and informative reply. I'll start auditioning other amps once I have the Qutest installed.
> 
> I also run the 2Qute into a Trilogy class A HP amp driving HD800, a combination that also sounds great to me. But I note Rob Watts saying that's not ideal either. Maybe I'm confusing the issue. Maybe that's more to do with missing the benefit of integration of DAC and HP amp in one product. Perhaps I should have just bought a Hugo 2!


Rob Watts makes a lot of comments about optimal playback from his perspective. I think his comments on 2Qute/Qutest + Trilogy HP amp are due to a number of factors:
1) It is unclear whether Trilogy's optimal input voltage is 3V (which is what 2Qute provides). It might perform better at 2V/1V which you can set with Qutest
2) Trilogy has a passive? preamp volume control and the sophisticated digital volume control from Chord Hugo 2/TT2/DAVE is always going to be more transparent than any analog preamp (active or passive). Note this is not true for all DACs because some DACs' digital volume control is not sufficiently sophisticated or the DACs themselves have too poor low-level linearity to allow for low volume output which is why those DACs tend to sound better with preamps.
3) A lot of class A amp actually has high levels of 2nd or 3rd harmonic distortions by design. The sound can often sound more euphonic.
4) A lot of amps have a lot of high frequency distortions.
So it is true that from Rob Watts' perspective, if your only system is DAC + amp + HD800, Hugo 2 + HD800 would theoretically be more optimal.
However, I'm a realist having played with audio products and upgraded many times and met many friends/audiophiles with different musical preferences. We all accumulate our gear in different ways and sometimes our favourite music benefits from some euphonic distortion. Who am I to say one system is theoretically suboptimal when the owner is enjoying his/her music tremendously.
From what I'm hearing and assuming, I'm assuming that you use the MFA to your nCore because you also listen to vinyl? Or maybe you have a home theatre/TV system connected to the MFA too so Chord 2Qute/Qutest is not your only source. Moreover, I personally don't think Hugo 2 is really as great as a desktop DAC because of the inclusion fo the battery and Hugo TT2 is just really expensive.
So given you have a headphone setup with the HD800, you have a speaker setup that probably includes vinyl or a different source, I think Qutest is probably the optimal upgrade for you.
I suspect once your Qutest arrives, what you'll notice is that music sounds a bit more transparent with more rhythmic and timbral accuracy off the Trilogy + HD800 vs the nCore + Audiovector. You can always decide whether you want to upgrade the nCore after enjoying the Qutest for a few months first.


----------



## David M H (Feb 17, 2020)

ecwl, thank you again for another interesting post.

Your assumptions make sense, but are actually wrong. I won't derail this thread by discussing my system much but the DAC is my only source. I ended up with the MFA as an attenuator only because of its minimal influence. I might have a complete system rethink.


----------



## ecwl

David M H said:


> ecwl, thank you again for another interesting post.
> 
> Your assumptions make sense, but are actually wrong. I won't derail this thread by discussing my system much but the DAC is my only source. I ended up with the MFA as an ettenuator only because of its minimal influence. I might have a complete system rethink.


Fair enough. I think I would suggest the following.
Upgrading from 2Qute to Qutest is a complete no brainer. I recommended a local friend to do so and he was absolutely ecstatic with no regrets.

Switching from Qutest + Trilogy amp to Hugo 2 is a more iffy proposition as different people have different sonic preferences so there is no guarantee that you’ll like the “upgrade”. If you’re upgrading directly to Hugo TT2, then I strongly suspect you can do it blind and you’ll prefer the sound over Qutest + Trilogy.
I suspect if you go from Qutest + PVC to Hugo 2 into the nCore, while the sound might be better you might not like the ergonomics of the Hugo 2 being plugged into the wall all the time. Whereas if you go straight to TT2, I doubt you’ll regret it, even if you do it blindly.

So my strong recommendation is that if you ever decide to try the Hugo 2, you need a home demo or a friend to lend you theirs in your home environment for at least a few days to decide if you really want to go in this direction. But of course, if possible, you should audition TT2 if that’s an upgrade you’re interested in.

Keep in mind, as you said, PVC is the most transparent analog volume control you can get. If I were you, I would just enjoy the Qutest for at least 6 months before exploring other options. And as I said before, I would also choose to upgrade nCore next if possible over Hugo 2 or TT2.


----------



## Reactcore

David M H said:


> ecwl, thank you again for another interesting post.
> 
> Your assumptions make sense, but are actually wrong. I won't derail this thread by discussing my system much but the DAC is my only source. I ended up with the MFA as an ettenuator only because of its minimal influence. I might have a complete system rethink.



Hi! Be sure u try driving your HP ditect out of Qutest. I also use a 800 which with 300ohm is perfectly suited. Im controlling my vollume digitally with foobar. No amp.. no loss. Qutest has actually a powerful amp on board. I made a simple rca to jack adapter for it.


----------



## ecwl

Reactcore said:


> Hi! Be sure u try driving your HP ditect out of Qutest. I also use a 800 which with 300ohm is perfectly suited. Im controlling my vollume digitally with foobar. No amp.. no loss. Qutest has actually a powerful amp on board. I made a simple rca to jack adapter for it.


Keep in mind though that Qutest doesn't have the 2nd-order analog noise shaper that Hugo 2, TT2 & DAVE have because it wasn't designed to drive headphones. As a result, depending on the headphone impedance load, you can get more high frequency distortions without this noise shaper. But if it works for your HD800, it should work for others. It then comes down to make sure the Qutest doesn't accidentally wreck the headphones with too much voltage. One just has to be super careful.
The other issue is how good the digital volume control is from the source. Rob Watts always recommends using Chord DACs' own digital volume control which is as transparent as can be. I've definitely listened to some fairly transparent digital volume control from Roon or JRiver but even in JRiver, if you set the settings wrong, the digital volume control can sound significantly worse. I have to admit I have never tried to compare the top digital volume controls with Chord's own as I suspect Chord would always be superior if fed bit-perfect data. But I do think this setup is totally worth trying for people who are curious but careful and willing to take a small risk.


----------



## David M H (Feb 17, 2020)

@ecwl: Yes, Chord tech support strongly advised me to always bypass JRiver volume control. Fairly obvious. Maybe Foobar is better, IDK.

I've known for some time that what I really want is a Hugo TT2. The price is off putting but I might later seriously reconsider everything, building a new system around the TT2.

Good advice is to live with Qutest for a several months before doing anything else.

@Reactcore: Interesting. Since your HD800 have obviously survived, I'll look into driving mine direct from the Qutest. 1V output? Thanks.


----------



## Victorr

Reactcore said:


> Im controlling my vollume digitally with foobar. No amp.. no loss.


I don’t want to upset you, but in this operation there may be significantly more loss of sound quality than when using most headphone amplifiers.


----------



## Jon L (Feb 18, 2020)

ecwl said:


> As a result, the more accurate transient analog waveforms coming out of Chord DACs would be slightly distorted in the time domain by the Class D amplifier leading to transients that are not as accurately as the Chord DACs can provide.



In the end, I believe it will come down to how much of subjective difference that "slight" distortion makes in real life.  Having used NCore and IceEdge with Chord Qutest, I would still take those combo's over traditional SS class A/AB amps ANYWHERE  near the price range of class D amps tried.  Especially when it comes to speaker systems, the effect of room reflections and acoustics tend to overwhelm these differences IME.


----------



## Reactcore

I did (ofcourse) extensive compararisons wih my Questyle amp-qutest combo and almost regret i bought the quesyle. As for the voltage i have Qutest at 2 v. Yes i had some accidental max volumes but at 300ohm senns its no prob. I wouldnt try max with sensitive iems.
I have also placed buffer capacitors over the internal 8v feed to the OP stage.


----------



## alekc

I am thinking about more desktop solution stricrly for headphones. Should I go with Qutest, Hugo 2 or pay more and start with Hugo TT right away. My mobile dac/amp is Mojo and I love its warm sound. 

As for USB islotation I already have iusb3 and igalvanic. I would preferably be using USB input and streaming from Tidal/Audirvana. CD transport can be a very distant future option. Any tips from long time Qutest users?


----------



## Reactcore

alekc said:


> I am thinking about more desktop solution stricrly for headphones. Should I go with Qutest, Hugo 2 or pay more and start with Hugo TT right away. My mobile dac/amp is Mojo and I love its warm sound.
> 
> As for USB islotation I already have iusb3 and igalvanic. I would preferably be using USB input and streaming from Tidal/Audirvana. CD transport can be a very distant future option. Any tips from long time Qutest users?



All depends on your budget.. if u have the funds go for tt2 (not tt 1st gen) ull want it later anyway. If u own a good amp then qutest measured better than hugo2. its also newer so chord had time to improve its circuitry further.. not to mention the pricetag offcourse.


----------



## alekc

Reactcore said:


> All depends on your budget.. if u have the funds go for tt2 (not tt 1st gen) ull want it later anyway. If u own a good amp then qutest measured better than hugo2. its also newer so chord had time to improve its circuitry further.. not to mention the pricetag offcourse.



Thank you @Reactcore for your input. The thing is that Hugo 2 can be bought with not that much more expensive price tag currently than Qutest. Hence my question. I don't think I want both. With Hugo TT the price tag gap is larger currently but I can wait a bit. On the other hand Hugo 2 is portable which applies to me since I am traveling a lot and while Mojo is great for both short and long trips (assuming you can recharge it somewhere in between) I like the idea of something bigger that I can take with me and use it on the desk in remote office or hotel.  

Tough choice - I know but please help me out guys


----------



## ecwl

alekc said:


> Thank you @Reactcore for your input. The thing is that Hugo 2 can be bought with not that much more expensive price tag currently than Qutest. Hence my question. I don't think I want both. With Hugo TT the price tag gap is larger currently but I can wait a bit. On the other hand Hugo 2 is portable which applies to me since I am traveling a lot and while Mojo is great for both short and long trips (assuming you can recharge it somewhere in between) I like the idea of something bigger that I can take with me and use it on the desk in remote office or hotel.
> 
> Tough choice - I know but please help me out guys


I would say the first decision point is whether you plan on using hard to drive headphones in the future (and how loud you listen to music). If you do, you probably should save up for TT2. None of my headphones are hard to drive so Hugo 2 is definitely the best bang for the buck. Sure, it’s not as desktop friendly but it works and you save on the headphone amp.
On the other hand, if you’re always going to use an external headphone amp with volume control, you might as well save money and commit to Qutest now. Because your headphone amp would limit how much more you’ll get out of using Hugo 2 or TT2 so Qutest becomes best bang for the buck.


----------



## alekc

@ecwl I try not to listen too loud  in order to be able to still hear the difference. I also almost don't have any hard to drive headphones. The one thing that made this decision more complex is this review of Qutest: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-and-measurements-of-chord-qutest-dac.5981/ 

While I highly doubt I would hear measured difference between Hugo 2 and Qutest you know the feeling when you know it is somewhere there  What headphone amp would you recommend for Quest. At the end I would like to have a similar sound in terms of warm like Mojo, but with more detail.


----------



## ecwl

alekc said:


> @ecwl I try not to listen too loud  in order to be able to still hear the difference. I also almost don't have any hard to drive headphones. The one thing that made this decision more complex is this review of Qutest: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-and-measurements-of-chord-qutest-dac.5981/
> 
> While I highly doubt I would hear measured difference between Hugo 2 and Qutest you know the feeling when you know it is somewhere there  What headphone amp would you recommend for Quest. At the end I would like to have a similar sound in terms of warm like Mojo, but with more detail.


I would not recommend any headphone amps with the Qutest because I think the combo of Qutest with any headphone amp inevitably leads to a loss of transparency compared to Hugo 2. I would only recommend Qutest if somebody already owns a favorite headphone amp and don't want to part with it. However, it is always possible that some people prefer Qutest + headphone amp vs Hugo 2 because depending on people's music listening preferences and actual preferred music they listen to, some music might sound more euphonic with the Qutest + headphone amp. If you're currently using Mojo and like it, and you want to upgrade, I think saving up for the Hugo 2 is the next logical upgrade.


----------



## alekc

ecwl said:


> I would not recommend any headphone amps with the Qutest because I think the combo of Qutest with any headphone amp inevitably leads to a loss of transparency compared to Hugo 2. I would only recommend Qutest if somebody already owns a favorite headphone amp and don't want to part with it. However, it is always possible that some people prefer Qutest + headphone amp vs Hugo 2 because depending on people's music listening preferences and actual preferred music they listen to, some music might sound more euphonic with the Qutest + headphone amp. If you're currently using Mojo and like it, and you want to upgrade, I think saving up for the Hugo 2 is the next logical upgrade.


Thank you @ecwl for valuable input and your time. It makes a lot of sense.


----------



## oldson

been considering buying a used 2qute or qutest , but having looked on chord's website support page i see no driver or firmware downloads available.
why is this?


----------



## alekc

oldson said:


> been considering buying a used 2qute or qutest , but having looked on chord's website support page i see no driver or firmware downloads available.
> why is this?


If you want driver for 2qute is it available on the product page (at least there is a link to driver - never tested it): https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/2qute/

Our of curiosity looking at your signature I've noticed you are using ifi micro idsd - are you planning to exchange it with Chord product or are you looking for 2qute/qutest for a different setup?


----------



## Clemmaster

oldson said:


> been considering buying a used 2qute or qutest , but having looked on chord's website support page i see no driver or firmware downloads available.
> why is this?


It’s on the product page, instead.


----------



## oldson

im looking to compare and potentially replace the ifi idsd


----------



## David M H

ecwl said:


> ... I would only recommend Qutest if somebody already owns a favorite headphone amp and don't want to part with it...



@ecwl Good shout. After just a short while replacing 2Qute with Qutest, double blind tests prove that I'm very pleased with the upgrade, both through my favourite HP amp and through my (limiting) nCore class D power amps.

My plan was to sell the 2Qute but after using it to directly drive my HD800, I'm going to keep it on my desk at work. Thanks, @Reactcore.


----------



## David M H

Qutest 1V output = considerably less attenuation = better SQ (more 'life') through my speaker system. Could be expectation bias but double blind tests suggest not.


----------



## Jon L

ecwl said:


> However, it is always possible that some people prefer Qutest + headphone amp vs Hugo 2 because depending on people's music listening preferences and actual preferred music they listen to


Or...some people own headphones that thrive on more power, e.g. Abyss 1266 Phi TC.
Hugo 2 740mW into 33 Ohms 
SMSL SP200 3 watts into 32 Ohms

Ridiculously stiff audiofool cables are a B**ch though.




0221202052 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## Baten

Jon L said:


> Or...some people own headphones that thrive on more power, e.g. Abyss 1266 Phi TC.
> Hugo 2 740mW into 33 Ohms
> SMSL SP200 3 watts into 32 Ohms
> 
> ...


This is the best way to connect an RCA output to the THX amp, over its XLR input
https://benchmarkmedia.com/products/benchmark-rca-to-xlrm-adapter-cable
as recommended by Andrew, one of the engineers of the THX AAA tech.

_This adapter cable extends balanced wiring to the RCA connector using star-quad wire to maximize the effectiveness of the balanced input:  One half of the star-quad ties Pin 3 of the XLR to the shield of the RCA connector.  The other half of the star-quad ties pin 2 of the XLR to the center pin on the RCA.  The braided shield ties pin 1 of the XLR to the shield of the RCA.

Using this special wiring, a ground-loop between the two audio devices will produce a current in the braided shield, but not in the audio signal lines. This keeps ground-loop currents out of the critical signal lines and greatly reduces the potential for interference. The separate connection from the RCA ground to pin 2 of the XLR provides a dedicated path for the audio ground reference. This wiring leverages the common-mode rejection of the balanced XLR input to reduce conducted interference.

To reduce magnetic interference, the audio signal is carried on two twisted pairs arranged in a star-quad configuration. This star-quad configuration provides immunity to hum-inducing magnetic fields produced by nearby electronic devices.

This cable provides the best method for directly interfacing an unbalanced output to a balanced input._


----------



## miketlse

oldson said:


> having looked on chord's website support page i see no driver or firmware downloads available.


Rob Watts approach for the dacs, is to spend a lot of time testing/optimising the code, until he believes the sound quality cannot be improved, given the design constraints for each model. 
No more updates are made to the code for that dac, so there are no firmware updates to download.

In contrast, Rob is not involved in the streamer (Poly and 2Go) designs, and these have been designed from day 1, to allow firmware updates.


----------



## Reactcore

My plan was to sell the 2Qute but after using it to directly drive my HD800, I'm going to keep it on my desk at work. Thanks, @Reactcore.
[/QUOTE]

Have u tried Qutest to drive direct too? Should b even better. The buffer caps i placed also give better control of the HP's drivers. Hugo and TT have those too.  Qutest normally dont need them feeding amps. But a HP draws more current. The caps deliver for the peaks. its specially noticable in the bass performance.


----------



## David M H

Reactcore said:


> Have u tried Qutest to drive direct too? Should b even better. The buffer caps i placed also give better control of the HP's drivers. Hugo and TT have those too.  Qutest normally dont need them feeding amps. But a HP draws more current. The caps deliver for the peaks. its specially noticable in the bass performance.



It's on my to do list. Thank you. For now, I'm just living with Qutest in my speaker system, and loving it so far.


----------



## gasmonkey

I have recently run into an issue where some/most HD music files have static crackle and pops during the more intense portions of the song, similar to clipping, but at very low volume as well. I assume this is down to my Dell laptop/Realtek speakers, but even after trying everything I still can't figure it out. THe workaround I have is to play Youtube music at 0% volume in a webbrowser outputting to laptop speakers. This allows Roon to serve HD files flawlessly. 

I am just a little worried I have a problem that isn't letting my system perform as it should. Thoughts?


----------



## miketlse

gasmonkey said:


> I have recently run into an issue where some/most HD music files have static crackle and pops during the more intense portions of the song, similar to clipping, but at very low volume as well. I assume this is down to my Dell laptop/Realtek speakers, but even after trying everything I still can't figure it out. THe workaround I have is to play Youtube music at 0% volume in a webbrowser outputting to laptop speakers. This allows Roon to serve HD files flawlessly.
> 
> I am just a little worried I have a problem that isn't letting my system perform as it should. Thoughts?


I don't see any mention of qutest there. Were you using it, or just playing everything via your laptop?


----------



## gasmonkey

miketlse said:


> I don't see any mention of qutest there. Were you using it, or just playing everything via your laptop?


The issue is only with Qutest. I feed Qutest with the laptop, through Roon, bitperfect. I try to stay as pure as I can. I feel there is an error with the laptop not feeding Qutest properly. I have the Qutest drivers installed, and thats what drives me crazy. Can't think of what could be going wrong


----------



## miketlse

gasmonkey said:


> The issue is only with Qutest. I feed Qutest with the laptop, through Roon, bitperfect. I try to stay as pure as I can. I feel there is an error with the laptop not feeding Qutest properly. I have the Qutest drivers installed, and thats what drives me crazy. Can't think of what could be going wrong


Yes I too think that you must have your laptop settings wrong.
Those settings could be related to roon, youtube or windows?
if you can post a screenshot of your roon settings, then hopefully one of the roon users can provide feedback as to whether they look right.


----------



## Victorr

gasmonkey said:


> I have recently run into an issue where some/most HD music files have static crackle and pops during the more intense portions of the song, similar to clipping, but at very low volume as well. I assume this is down to my Dell laptop/Realtek speakers, but even after trying everything I still can't figure it out. THe workaround I have is to play Youtube music at 0% volume in a webbrowser outputting to laptop speakers. This allows Roon to serve HD files flawlessly.


Try while you use the DAC to disable the built-in sound card in the device manager.


----------



## Victorr

Victorr said:


> Try while you use the DAC to disable the built-in sound card in the device manager.


Also check in the properties of the digital audio output whether exclusive mode is provided to this output.


----------



## gasmonkey

Victorr said:


> Try while you use the DAC to disable the built-in sound card in the device manager.





Victorr said:


> Also check in the properties of the digital audio output whether exclusive mode is provided to this output.










Yesterday I disabled the microphone and speaker by "disabling" it in hardware manager. No improvement. I have also tried just about every setting, from default or low clock priority to big buffers. Computer shouldn't have an issue serving the files, hardware spec wise its overkill.


----------



## Victorr

gasmonkey said:


> Yesterday I disabled the microphone and speaker by "disabling" it in hardware manager. No improvement. I have also tried just about every setting, from default or low clock priority to big buffers. Computer shouldn't have an issue serving the files, hardware spec wise its overkill.


In the task pane, click on the speaker, then on the DAC icon. In the "Digital output - Properties" window that opens, on the "Advanced" tab, check if there is a check in "Exclusive mode". If not, then check these two positions (I have Ukrainian Windows).


----------



## gasmonkey

Longtime Qutest owner with a new Class A/AB Power amp here.... Have a few questions that I think may have relevance to others in this thread.

1. How to calculate the theoretically appropriate Voltage output for Qutest to properly utilize the sweetspot of a Power Amp.
2. To pre-amp or not to pre-amp?

1) My Power amp is 100 watts with a gain of 26.6db (460ish x the original signal) Not sure exactly how many watts of Class A there is, but think around 17.
1a) How many milliwatts does 1V, 2V, 3V put out?
1b) I think that 17000 MW / 460 = a sweet spot output of 37mw from Qutest?
1c) Is there a "cleanest" voltage out setting if ignoring amp compatibility?

2) General consensus is a Pre-amp will help. But, if the Power Amp is going to do the same gain anyway, and I can digitally control the Qutest volume, I don't see the need for a pre-amp. Am I not understanding something? (Besides the fact that bitperfect really only works at 100% volume, but this is offset by the 768khz upsampling, so the effect is minimalized)
2a) Do you use a pre-amp? or just Qutest to Power Amp and control volume digitally?


----------



## tesarpa

ad 2) I'd fear that software sends 100 % signal strength to power amp and blows my speakers.


----------



## HumanMedia

gasmonkey said:


> I don't see the need for a pre-amp. Am I not understanding something? (Besides the fact that bitperfect really only works at 100% volume, but this is offset by the 768khz upsampling, so the effect is minimalized)
> 2a) Do you use a pre-amp? or just Qutest to Power Amp and control volume digitally?


IMO software volume control ruins the waveform, upsampling later will just upscale a severely lumpy and compromised signal. It will in no way make up for the severe loss of information. done correctly INSIDE the dac before it goes to analog is fine, just not prior to the DAC


----------



## gasmonkey

tesarpa said:


> ad 2) I'd fear that software sends 100 % signal strength to power amp and blows my speakers.



I have the advantage of having speakers that want 80-160 watts, so sending them 100 watts at full volume is only an issue for my ears and the neighbors.

But +1 for good point, no physical volume control to manually turn down before playing music.



HumanMedia said:


> IMO software volume control ruins the waveform, upsampling later will just upscale a severely lumpy and compromised signal. It will in no way make up for the severe loss of information. done correctly INSIDE the dac before it goes to analog is fine, just not prior to the DAC



This, as I understand it, is exactly what is happening. The volume control is relegated to the internals of the Chord Qutest, but can be told what volume from Roon, and from Roon on my phone. 

Still leaves the question how correctly it is done inside the DAC, but I generally trust that 768khz is enough headroom and @robwatts did a good job on the implementation.


----------



## Icenine2

I've joined the club here. Should be here on Tuesday.


----------



## Reactcore

IMO software volume control ruins the waveform, upsampling later will just upscale a severely lumpy and compromised signal. It will in no way make up for the severe loss of information. done correctly INSIDE the dac before it goes to analog is fine, just not prior to the DAC
[/QUOTE]

I did severe comparison to either max digital volume in f2k and using a (pre)amp or direct out to my HP. Must say the lack of extra circuitry in the chain really prevails in SQ. Software vol. control only changes the amplitude information of the PCM signal.


----------



## jwbrent

Icenine2 said:


> I've joined the club here. Should be here on Tuesday.



Congrats! It should rock your world.


----------



## HumanMedia

gasmonkey said:


> I have the advantage of having speakers that want 80-160 watts, so sending them 100 watts at full volume is only an issue for my ears and the neighbors.
> 
> But +1 for good point, no physical volume control to manually turn down before playing music.
> 
> ...



@Rob Watts
Please set us straight here. 
As far as I know there is no internal volume control in the Qutest that the user can control or that any preceding software can control?
I know there is in the TT2, but not in the Qutest, and even the TT2 cannot have its internal volume control controlled by Roon?

As far as I know Any volume changes that happen with Roon occur by DSPing inside Roon, and sending out non-bit perfect probably decimated data. Note that you need to turn a few default settings off in Roon to stop it screwing with the data. Some have innocuous sounding names that don’t immediately suggest that they will screw with the data. I had to check settings with a Roon support person to be completely sure it was sending untouched audio data. And again correct me if I am wrong, but to get the cleanest, best digital reconstruction of the analog sound, that Qutest should be fed the untouched non-decimated, native sampling rate data and let Qutest do the processing? (Apart from an MScaler of course)


----------



## Rob Watts

Correct - no user volume control on Qutest.

And no Chord DAC implements Roon controlled volume via USB commands.

I doubt very much that Roon would decimate whilst doing something simple like adding a volume control.

Volume control function involves taking the data, multiplying it by a coefficient; if your data is 24 bits, and the coefficient is say 24 bits then the result is 48 bits. But we need to get it back to 24 bits (or 32 for USB) and this is where the problems start. Normally, you truncate by using dither - just truncating by discarding the unused bits creates distortion so don't do that - but dither isn't perfect. The best from a transparency POV is Gaussian dither, which is better than the usual triangular dither - you get noticeable better sense of depth and detail resolution from Gaussian. The only way of completely maintaining full transparency when truncating is to use 11th order noise shaping, and this only at 705/768 kHz.

Having said all that, you would be better off using Roon to do the volume control than using a pre-amp or a passive volume control, as these all add distortion and degrade small signal accuracy too.

Yes keep your source bit perfect (apart from when you have to do volume control with Qutest) is the best approach.


----------



## gasmonkey (Mar 9, 2020)

Good to know. Not sure where I came up with the notion that Qutest could do the digital volume, but glad to be set straight so I have a better working knowledge. Robb's advice does go contrary to my next planned step, a First Watt Buffer Preamp (B1) to control volume and tweak channel balance of speakers.

I may try it anyway, couldn't hurt to have in my audio arsenal. I would be happy if the Buffer preamp would have a negative effect equivalent to DSP, but allow for great volume control than 1db steps.


----------



## Icenine2

Just received mine from HeadAmp now. This thing is just cool beyond belief. Packaging is an A+. Part of the experience to me. A big thanks to Justin at Headamp. Bought this and free two day shipping. Excellent.


----------



## Icenine2

All super great. I am a believer


----------



## Icenine2

Traded this in and Bought a Hugo TT 2. Jumping squares. Qutest was incredible too.


----------



## HumanMedia

Icenine2 said:


> Traded this in and Bought a Hugo TT 2. Jumping squares. Qutest was incredible too.



How do the two compare, in your experience?


----------



## Chop-Top

Icenine2 said:


> Traded this in and Bought a Hugo TT 2. Jumping squares. Qutest was incredible too.


Is it worth the additional approx $3,800?


----------



## Deolum

Anyone heard 2 or more of those: 2qute, qutest, Mojo, ADI 2 Dac, and can give his impressions in comparison?


----------



## schnesim

Deolum said:


> Anyone heard 2 or more of those: 2qute, qutest, Mojo, ADI 2 Dac, and can give his impressions in comparison?


Here's a comparison Mojo - ADI 2
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/rme-adi-2-dac-thread.868015/post-15524656


----------



## Icenine2

HumanMedia said:


> How do the two compare, in your experience?


Both are excellent. I do notice a difference w/TT 2 in imaging and detail. I really  wanted an all in one box. I used my Cavalli Liquid Fire w/Qutest and the sound was excellent. I had considered getting a HeadAmp GSX mini to power the Qutest and instead went with the all-in-one TT 2. Justin at HeadAmp (where I bought both from and he is excellent w/shipping and communication) said he thought the GSX mini/Qutest combo was very good.


----------



## Icenine2

Chop-Top said:


> Is it worth the additional approx $3,800?


That can only be answered by you. I could have lived w/Qutest and been super happy. Asking that is like these guys spending $40K on an MSB DAC. If I figured the original cost of my Cavalli Liquid Fire+Qutest I'd be close to that price. A HeadAmp GSX mini+Qutest is about $3500 which is what I would personally get if I hadn't purchased the TT 2.


----------



## Chop-Top

Icenine2 said:


> That can only be answered by you. I could have lived w/Qutest and been super happy. Asking that is like these guys spending $40K on an MSB DAC. If I figured the original cost of my Cavalli Liquid Fire+Qutest I'd be close to that price. A HeadAmp GSX mini+Qutest is about $3500 which is what I would personally get if I hadn't purchased the TT 2.


Thanks I was thinking for the DAC difference alone is it worth $3800?  With the amp factored in it brings you much closer.  I'm using my Qutest with Naim UnitiQute, Headline and HD800.  Next step up for me will probably be the next generation DAVE.


----------



## Icenine2

I forgot to add the cost of interconnects from amp to DAC as well. I have humble Moon Audio Blue Dragon (Old version silver not copper) and that's another $200. And that is a low price for this gear I think, plus I had 2 Shunyata power cords, one for DAC, one for Amp too. Obviously you can do this all with stock but the Hugo TT 2 needs none of those.


----------



## DJJEZ

Has anyone compared the topping D90 to the Qutest??

i just got a D90 today in my setup which is hifiman Arya > topping D90 > THX887. i also have a chord mojo and love the sound quality. 

Thinking of trying a Qutest to see how it compares to the D90


----------



## HumanMedia

DJJEZ said:


> Has anyone compared the topping D90 to the Qutest??
> 
> i just got a D90 today in my setup which is hifiman Arya > topping D90 > THX887. i also have a chord mojo and love the sound quality.
> 
> Thinking of trying a Qutest to see how it compares to the D90



Not the D90, only the D50
https://audiobacon.net/2019/12/24/topping-d50s-dac-review/


----------



## DJJEZ

HumanMedia said:


> Not the D90, only the D50
> https://audiobacon.net/2019/12/24/topping-d50s-dac-review/



thank you . i will have a read


----------



## ekol (Mar 30, 2020)

Hello everyone, I join the thread, as I am thinking of replacing my beloved DacMagic Plus with the promising Qutest.

My current setup: Mac (Roon)> USB> DacMagic > A: (Headphone) Grade RA-1> Grade RS1 / Grade 325 - B: (Speakers) Teac A-H500> Bose 301

I suppose that the change between the DacMagic and the Qutest will be remarkable, however, before buying it, I would like to hear your opinion and what you think about the integration in my configuration.

Any experience with the Qutest and the RA-1?

Thanks and I wait your tips.


----------



## Victorr

ekol said:


> DacMagic and the Qutest


The difference will be huge. The DacMagic has a sharp synthetic sound. The Qutest sound is absolutely natural.


----------



## ekol

Victorr said:


> The difference will be huge. The DacMagic has a sharp synthetic sound. The Qutest sound is absolutely natural.



Thanks for your reply! What do you thinks about the posible synergy with the Grado's and the Teac?


----------



## Victorr

ekol said:


> What do you thinks about the posible synergy with the Grado's and the Teac?


Qutest - the “player" of the major league. Your Teac obviously does not reach this level and can significantly reduce the advantages of this DAC. But everything happens gradually and in stages. So you have everything ahead.


----------



## ekol

Victorr said:


> Qutest - the “player" of the major league. Your Teac obviously does not reach this level and can significantly reduce the advantages of this DAC. But everything happens gradually and in stages. So you have everything ahead.


 
Thanks! I know that the weak part of my setup is the TEAC (now is the best I can afford), but I'm worried about the use with the Grado RA-1 too... Is this DAC too good for the rest of my components?


----------



## Victorr

ekol said:


> Is this DAC too good for the rest of my components?


You will tell us about this after you buy Qutest and listen.


----------



## ekol

Victorr said:


> You will tell us about this after you buy Qutest and listen.



Thank you, if I finally decide to buy it, I will leave my impressions. If anyone has tried it with the Grado, I would appreciate your feedback. I keep reading you.


----------



## bikutoru

ekol said:


> Thanks! I know that the weak part of my setup is the TEAC (now is the best I can afford), but I'm worried about the use with the Grado RA-1 too... Is this DAC too good for the rest of my components?


The only Grado I have is MS-1, plugging into a chain with Chord dac in it is always a revelation what a miracle Grado headphones are. There is no soundstage to speak off, but the sound, the sound is on par with all the greatest and expensive headphones I've heard. My Qutest was replaced with TT2, in my speaker system, but I still have 2Qute with LakePeople amp in a desktop system, and my Grado sound excellent.


----------



## stretchneck

bikutoru said:


> The only Grado I have is MS-1, plugging into a chain with Chord dac in it is always a revelation what a miracle Grado headphones are. There is no soundstage to speak off, but the sound, the sound is on par with all the greatest and expensive headphones I've heard. My Qutest was replaced with TT2, in my speaker system, but I still have 2Qute with LakePeople amp in a desktop system, and my Grado sound excellent.


How would you rate the step up from Qutest to TT2 - worth the money?

Also, can people share what dedicated preamplifiers they're using with the Qutest?  I would like one with balanced outputs.  I would imagine that the preamp would need to be <£1,000 otherwise might as well fund a TT2...


----------



## bikutoru

stretchneck said:


> How would you rate the step up from Qutest to TT2 - worth the money?
> 
> Also, can people share what dedicated preamplifiers they're using with the Qutest?  I would like one with balanced outputs.  I would imagine that the preamp would need to be <£1,000 otherwise might as well fund a TT2...


Depends. If you have *some* money, the things under consideration:
1. Headphone ports to drive 99% of headphones. While everybody brags their 3K+ headphones with it, my MS-1 Grado out of it is divine.
2. Ability to drive efficient speakers directly, you'd need to make or buy special adapters.
3. Better...everything, oh boy, just search... How much better? My definition - inversely proportional to the ability to pay for it.
4. Stop here, if all you care is, listening to music
5. Gives your ego a huge boost, with very colorful lights, when it comes on.

Is it really better, it is, but if I couldn't afford it, I'd be just as happy with Qutest. Still happy with 2Qute in my desktop setting and Mojo in the office.
We didn't go into M-Scaler discussion yet. I've been trying to convince myself for months that I don't need it, but every time I turn it off, I miss it.


----------



## elira

bikutoru said:


> I've been trying to convince myself for months that I don't need it, but every time I turn it off, I miss it.


What do you think is missing when you turn it off?


----------



## bikutoru

elira said:


> What do you think is missing when you turn it off?


Let me try.
M Scaler has a 'bypass switch', a lot of people can hear it immediately, I'm not really one of them, or at least it is not day and night for me. The best way to describe is with analogy to photography. If you make a picture with autofocus, sharpness is not quite always there, or not where you want it. You switch to manual focus and you can tune it exactly where you want focus it to be and make it as sharp as your eye. Both photographs, with auto and manual focus can look good, but the one with manual focus is just going to be spot on, when the other one just good. The same with M Scaler, it is "sharp", the naturalness and ease of music is just so vivid. It might that last 1-5% that usually don't quite matter, but when they are there, they are there.
Music, that I usually don't care for, if it was produced/recorded well, all of a sudden I can, if not like, at least appreciate. I discovered so much that I can love. 

In my book, the price is insane, but do I love what it makes me feel!


----------



## stretchneck

"inversely proportional to the ability to pay for it." LOL spot on.

Any feedback on preamplifiers people are using?  I mainly listen to stereo rather than headphones...


----------



## Zzt231gr

stretchneck said:


> "inversely proportional to the ability to pay for it." LOL spot on.
> 
> Any feedback on preamplifiers people are using?  I mainly listen to stereo rather than headphones...


Passive shunt diy pre here.

Driving Exposure power amp and Epos speakers.Extremely revealing setup-nothing is missing!


----------



## stretchneck

Zzt231gr said:


> Passive shunt diy pre here.
> 
> Driving Exposure power amp and Epos speakers.Extremely revealing setup-nothing is missing!



Do you have details, or link, to your Passive shunt diy pre?


----------



## bikutoru

stretchneck said:


> "inversely proportional to the ability to pay for it." LOL spot on.
> 
> Any feedback on preamplifiers people are using?  I mainly listen to stereo rather than headphones...


No experience with them, no comment.
I had never used Qutest with headphones. Occasional headphone listen with TT2/MScaler(mostly speakers duties), no amp needed. With 2Qute I use the Lake People G105 amp, which is very transparent. With Mojo, no amp needed.


----------



## Zzt231gr

stretchneck said:


> Do you have details, or link, to your Passive shunt diy pre?


It consists of a blue Alps pot and a Vishay Zfoil resistor.The box,including the pot and RCAs was bought from Ebay.Search as passive Alps preamplifier and you will find it.The electrical connection is easily found on the internet.


----------



## daredevil_kk

stretchneck said:


> "inversely proportional to the ability to pay for it." LOL spot on.
> 
> Any feedback on preamplifiers people are using?  I mainly listen to stereo rather than headphones...


I’m using a Spectral DMC-15 with it on my stereo. The Qutest deserve the best to bring out what it can do.


----------



## zjred (Apr 18, 2020)

I have a slight issue with my Qutest. It keeps getting stuck at PCM 48khz no matter what files I play, hence the light is always an orange-red. Source is my iPhone via the USB3.0 CCK (the one with a charging port). Anyone with the same problem?





I tried using PC as source and during setup, the available bitrates for me to ‘check off’ is only up to 96khz as well. In the advanced tab, I selected the highest available option and the light turns purple, but it does not cycle when I play different bitrate files. Is this normal?


----------



## miketlse

zjred said:


> I have a slight issue with my Qutest. It keeps getting stuck at PCM 48khz no matter what files I play, hence the light is always an orange-red. Source is my iPhone via the USB3.0 CCK (the one with a charging port). Anyone with the same problem?
> 
> 
> 
> I tried using PC as source and during setup, the available bitrates for me to ‘check off’ is only up to 96khz as well. In the advanced tab, I selected the highest available option and the light turns purple, but it does not cycle when I play different bitrate files. Is this normal?


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-mojo-dac-amp-☆★►faq-in-3rd-post-◄★☆.784602/post-12600357

The standard Apple music player is limited to 48kHz, so it will downscale your HD music to this rate.
You need to play your music using a different app.


----------



## zjred

miketlse said:


> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-mojo-dac-amp-☆★►faq-in-3rd-post-◄★☆.784602/post-12600357
> 
> The standard Apple music player is limited to 48kHz, so it will downscale your HD music to this rate.
> You need to play your music using a different app.


Hi, I’m forgot to mention I’m using KaiserTone. IOS 13.4.1.


----------



## miketlse

zjred said:


> Hi, I’m forgot to mention I’m using KaiserTone. IOS 13.4.1.


In that case, the max bitrate issue must be caused by one of the KaiserTone or iPhone settings.
I don't have an iPhone, but hopefully an owner will reply soon.


----------



## zjred

miketlse said:


> In that case, the max bitrate issue must be caused by one of the KaiserTone or iPhone settings.
> I don't have an iPhone, but hopefully an owner will reply soon.


Thank you so much for your quick replies. I have solved it in a rather painful way and last resort method.

Prior to posting for help, I had reset the app to default settings, reconnecting with different CCKs (I have a few) and cables in case there is some issues.

What really helped was to delete and reinstall the app. Now the lights are cycling with different bitrate files... and I have to reload 120GB of music back. T_T


----------



## alexl993

I've recently acquired a pair of Audeze LCD-X's.  I've been using a Dragonfly Cobalt but looking to upgrade now.  I've narrowed down my options and see I can get a new Qutest or a used Hugo2 for about the same cost. I've not listened to anything (how can we during lockdown?)  Apparently, they have the same exact DAC.  I don't need the portability of the Hugo2 but like the idea of amp/dac combo with battery power all-in-one.  I've also head that the amp in the Hugo2 works well with the LCD-X.  I have no idea of what sandalone amp to consider (there's to much choice!!!) Any suggestions or advice?


----------



## DecentLevi

Hey guys I just got a used Qutest. I'm interested in setting up the best connection between it and my Singxer SU-1 audio bridge. Looks like the only compatible cable type is BNC. So would I get a BNC cable from the S/PDIF1 to BNC input of the Qutest? Or would that be from the MCLK/WCK of the Qutest? I was about to get a BNC cable from Blue Jeans cable company but looks like I have to choose between 12G or RG-7 size whatever that means?

And any recommendation for the best cable brand would be appreciated. I would prefer just to get an affordable cable unless there's a noticeable improvement in fidelity.
... thanks in advance folks!


----------



## Victorr (Apr 22, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> So would I get a BNC cable from the S/PDIF1 to BNC input of the Qutest?


Yes, it must be connected in this way. Another option is to transmit "Word Clock" (clock signals for synchronization). Qutest does not need this.
You can also connect the USB to Qutest directly, bypassing the SU-1.



DecentLevi said:


> And any recommendation for the best cable brand would be appreciated


If the distance is not large, then such a cable will be more than enough.
https://www.amazon.com/Hosa-BNC-59-.../B000068OFB/ref=psdc_3236443011_t1_B004NCW478


----------



## DecentLevi

Thanks for your advice.
I got the version called Belden 1695A from Blue Jeans cable here, it's the 3rd version down. I went with this one because it's plenum rated so it should be thicker and more isolated... 3 feet, white to look cooler than all those black cables 😉. They're based in my hometown and they have reasonable prices on great hi-fi quality cables of all different types.

So is there any kind of consensus on this thread if the Qutest really does perform comparably or perhaps even better than the Hugo2, and which input / connection type has been more preferable?


----------



## jbarrentine

Icenine2 said:


> Traded this in and Bought a Hugo TT 2. Jumping squares. Qutest was incredible too.



I haven't been on the forum in some time. But lol, these two posts were one after another and quite funny. Glad you moved up, wish I could join you. That Chord sound is so purty.


----------



## Icenine2

Yes


----------



## nwavesailor

I owned the Qutest, until today, and have also moved up to a TT2. The Qutest was a very nice step up in a DAC and I knew it was special, literally from the very first song. 
Yes, the TT2 is better an I am using it with Empy and VO.


----------



## Icenine2

nwavesailor said:


> I owned the Qutest, until today, and have also moved up to a TT2. The Qutest was a very nice step up in a DAC and I knew it was special, literally from the very first song.
> Yes, the TT2 is better an I am using it with Empy and VO.


I see you sail. Looks like the Gorge


----------



## nwavesailor

Yes, it is The Gorge and I do really LOVE to windsurf! 

I (foolishly) thought I'd be out sailing by now seeing we are all WAY more than 6' apart, BUT the govt. types found it easier to just close all the WA and OR launches!

Hopefully these will open soon. Do you windsurf?


----------



## Icenine2

Used to. Kids and family. Sometime this next year I hope to take it up again. Excellent for you.


----------



## Triode User

Not to divert the thread  . . . but this is me on the Solway Firth in the UK. 

It is a not very wide bit of sea on the west coast between England and Scotland. (You can see Scotland on a good day).

The locals there have a saying . . . . . . .

 "If you can't see Scotland it is raining. If you can see Scotland it is going to rain."


----------



## nwavesailor (Apr 23, 2020)

Triode User said:


> Not to divert the thread  . . . but this is me on the Solway Firth in the UK.
> 
> It is a not very wide bit of sea on the west coast between England and Scotland. (You can see Scotland on a good day).
> 
> ...



NICE!

Gotta know..........Did you make that jump or was it an ugly landing? Sure make my jibe (gybe) look pretty boring.


----------



## Triode User

nwavesailor said:


> NICE!
> 
> Gotta know..........Did you make that jump or was it an ugly landing? Sure make my jibe (gybe) look pretty boring.



Made it as far as I recall. It was pretty windy that day during the Christmas holidays a few years ago.  

Do not undermine your gybe, there is nothing as sweet as planing all the way through a gybe!


----------



## Icenine2

nwavesailor said:


> Yes, it is The Gorge and I do really LOVE to windsurf!
> 
> I (foolishly) thought I'd be out sailing by now seeing we are all WAY more than 6' apart, BUT the govt. types found it easier to just close all the WA and OR launches!
> 
> Hopefully these will open soon. Do you windsurf?


Are you associated with NorthWave sails? Great stuff.


----------



## nwavesailor

Icenine2 said:


> Are you associated with NorthWave sails? Great stuff.



My only association to Northwave is having sailed their great sails for close to 30 years and they do give me a discount! Not a team rider. 

Still being made in The Gorge, Oregon which is a pretty special. I ask my friends using other brands " What part of The Gorge is Sri Lanka?"


----------



## Icenine2

nwavesailor said:


> My only association to Northwave is having sailed their great sails for close to 30 years and they do give me a discount! Not a team rider.
> 
> Still being made in The Gorge, Oregon which is a pretty special. I ask my friends using other brands " What part of The Gorge is Sri Lanka?"


Hah!  I sailed Sailworks for 15 years. Used to have Doyle hollow boards too


----------



## nwavesailor

Doyle's were GREAT boards!


----------



## Icenine2

Yes. Really nice. I had an 8-10 I just loved in medium wind.


----------



## Victorr (Apr 24, 2020)

I recall that in childhood I was engaged in fencing. Can I talk about this? Why not?


----------



## Chop-Top

Victorr said:


> I recall that in childhood I was engaged in fencing. Can I talk about this? Why not?


I fenced my Qutest to get a TT2  LOL


----------



## nwavesailor

Chop-Top said:


> I fenced my Qutest to get a TT2  LOL



I hear ya! I used some 'Magical' thinking to justify the cost of the Qutest. 

#1) purchase price of Qutest applied to TT2
#2) Sold SS amp and using the TT2 amp for HP
#3)Uncle Sugar's stimulus $$$!

ONLY  $1300 'NEW' dollars. That is the 'Magical' justification part!


----------



## Relaxasaurus

If any other Qutest owners are interested in parting with their unit, or willing to let me borrow it for a couple of days for a review, feel free to send a PM. 

Hoping to do a shootout between it and the ADI-2 + ARES II. All different price points but special in their own right. I heard the Hugo 2 pretty extensively at Canjam but a loud auditorium isn't an ideal location to pickup on DAC characteristics.


----------



## DecentLevi

So I've already gotten my BNC / SDI cable from BlueJeans cable co. a few days ago, and it's a great Improvement vs with USB direct, and even better than USB direct also vis ifi Micro iPurifier and Wyrd in between. And I'm using it with those two along with the Singxer SU-1, now with the BNC / SDI cable into the Qutest. I'm noticing even better soundstage, dynamics, and more resolving drums, if that makes any sense.

Looking to go for the gold, maxing out potential on this Qutest... Would anybody mind to tell me what the best and most affordable option is for power isolation on the Qutest? I've heard that it can benefit from some kind of power treatment.

Also, what is the purpose of this process below? 


Zzt231gr said:


> It consists of a blue Alps pot and a Vishay Zfoil resistor.The box,including the pot and RCAs was bought from Ebay.Search as passive Alps preamplifier and you will find it.The electrical connection is easily found on the internet.


----------



## Victorr

DecentLevi said:


> Also, what is the purpose of this process below?


Passive volume control. It is used instead of the pre-amplifier. It is installed between the source (DAC, CD player, etc.) and the power amplifier or active speakers.


----------



## DecentLevi (Apr 28, 2020)

Victorr said:


> Passive volume control. It is used instead of the pre-amplifier. It is installed between the source (DAC, CD player, etc.) and the power amplifier or active speakers.


That's odd, I've never heard / seen about passive volume controls before even after 10 years in the hobby and a lot of events. With my limited exposure to the concept it would seem to just add a longer signal path and another redundant volume knob since most amps already have a volume knob. Or am I missing any possible benefit?


----------



## DecentLevi

I just keep my laptop source volume (XMOS direct tunnel) at 100% and control the volume through the amp. For a pre-amp the only time I use one is before my electrostat rig, but even then it's not necessary so the only function that serves is as a tube buffer to add some nice tube warmth / soundstage.


----------



## DecentLevi (Apr 28, 2020)

And is there any sort of consensus on any alternative power supply / treatment option that gives better sound with the Qutest than the included wall-wart? (hopefully affordable) I thought I've read about this improving the sound of it somewhere.


----------



## Victorr

DecentLevi said:


> That's odd, I've never heard / seen about passive volume controls before even after 10 years in the hobby and a lot of events. With my limited exposure to the concept it would seem to just add a longer signal path and another redundant volume knob since most amps already have a volume knob. Or am I missing any possible benefit?



I meant a pure power amplifier, without a block of adjustments and switching. There is an opinion (I am not a supporter of this opinion) that the pre-amplifier or the corresponding unit in the integrated amplifier negatively affects the sound quality.


----------



## Victorr

DecentLevi said:


> And is there any sort of consensus on any alternative power supply / treatment option that gives better sound with the Qutest than the included wall-wart? (hopefully affordable) I thought I've read about this improving the sound of it somewhere.


The developer of this device (Rob Watts) believes that this is unnecessary. Here it was repeatedly discussed.


----------



## Triode User

DecentLevi said:


> That's odd, I've never heard / seen about passive volume controls before even after 10 years in the hobby and a lot of events. With my limited exposure to the concept it would seem to just add a longer signal path and another redundant volume knob since most amps already have a volume knob. Or am I missing any possible benefit?



The passive pre amp comes into its own between a fixed output source such as a Quest and a power amplifier which has no volume control.

My favoured passive pre is a Transformer Volume Control (TVC) such as made by Music First. I find them to be much more transparent than an active preamp and not far off the transparency of the volume control of the Dave. My prized possession is a Music First Classic V2 pre amp with with silver wired transformers.


----------



## gasmonkey (Apr 28, 2020)

Victorr said:


> The developer of this device (Rob Watts) believes that this is unnecessary. Here it was repeatedly discussed.



I have read through Rob's opinion on the stock wall wart being sufficient, a battery eliminating any problems that may exist in the home power supply, the Qutest having galvanic isolation, and an unplugged laptop being ideal as well.

I generally agree with everything Rob says. Certainly an unplugged laptop is King so far. But power wise I do have to disagree. I tried battery packs, and they were ok/good/not much of a difference as compared to plugging into the wall. I did however NOT find any kind of battery power that was ideal. The battery Rob suggests in unobtainium, and I cannot find a battery that is native 5V, not 3.7v noisily switched to 5V.

I got a small but definite improvement by plugging the Qutest into a Power Isolator. I considered the issue of Power to the Qutest solved a long time ago, with Rob's untouched godlike reputation as an oracle still in tact.

Then there was a discussion on another thread about whether there was merit to creating clean DC power, even if using a high quality power isolator. Theoretically I thought, yes, a specific device to create clean DC power would do something different that a power isolator/AC power cleaner doesnt do. I found a local dealer of an "entry level" DC power creation product, the Sbooster, and gave it a demo.

I no longer believe EVERYTHING Rob says. Just most of it. Replacing the wall wart can make a big difference, but as with anything, the system is only as good as the weakest link. I was shocked that the $469 CAD price point 5v dc power Sbooster made such a difference, I was expecting to maybe see a small increase, like upgrading a power cable, or putting some vibration control under an amp, or no benefit at all. I thought I might have to spend the big bucks if I wanted even a small improvement.

I definitely feel that for 20% of the price of the Chord Qutest, I got a deal as everything just got noticeably better

I have a almost full range loudspeaker setup with a fully treated room. I noticed the timbre was instantly more natural, even if I didn't understand before what Timbre was, it was just better, and I instantly understood what is was. The background details crystalized together clearer than ever before. The first 3 tracks I played from my collection of reference tracks Ive played hundreds of times brought 1+ new discoveries per track. The difference isn't debatable. All of a sudden I was able to determine which of my favorite tracks had subtle harmonies and which were just echos or instruments that complimented vocals. Certain tracks had vocals in the background that added a general ambiance to the music, but that now became distinct entities themselves. All of a sudden I could follow every word and nuance of the choirs in the background, even when they weren't thrust prominently to the foreground for a chorus.

As for the Sbooster, I know it works, but Im not sure if similar results can be had for less money, or if better results can be had for more money.

What I do know is that Rob Watts is full of crap RE: stock wall wart. And this is probably the only time ever I will get to say that


----------



## Jon L

gasmonkey said:


> As for the Sbooster, I know it works, but Im not sure if similar results can be had for less money, or if better results can be had for more money.



Have you tried or have access to iFi iPower or iPower X to compare to Sbooster?


----------



## jbarrentine

I'm using the ipower. I don't detect any difference. I just did it for giggles.


----------



## DecentLevi (Apr 29, 2020)

gasmonkey said:


> I have read through Rob's opinion on the stock wall wart being sufficient, a battery eliminating any problems that may exist in the home power supply, the Qutest having galvanic isolation, and an unplugged laptop being ideal as well.
> 
> I generally agree with everything Rob says. Certainly an unplugged laptop is King so far. But power wise I do have to disagree. I tried battery packs, and they were ok/good/not much of a difference as compared to plugging into the wall. I did however NOT find any kind of battery power that was ideal. The battery Rob suggests in unobtainium, and I cannot find a battery that is native 5V, not 3.7v noisily switched to 5V.
> 
> ...



Quite helpful info. thanks. When you said you plugged the Qutest into a power isolator, do you mean you plugged the wall-wart into something like a power regenerator or power conditioner? For me, my wall-wart has been plugged into my Furman IT REF 15I Power Conditioner all along. I assumed this may not make a difference with the Qutest, being that the power to it is still switched from AC to DC within the wall-wart. When I get home I will try connecting my Qutest into a mobile power bank, but hopefully that won't cause too much of a surge or anything? It's definitely 5 volts, but it may / may not be one or two AH higher than what it needs.

Also, do you mind to post the link for which thread that was, which you said they were talking about the merits to creating clean DC power?

Also @jbarrentine you said you didn't hear a difference with the iFi iPower into the DAC. I was curious what is your chain? Which hadphones, amp, and do you listen to well mastered lossless audio files? Not saying the power purifier must make an audible difference, just that perhaps your gear was affecting the ability to notice it.


----------



## DecentLevi

I'm definitely interested in those clean power options. I just tried powering the Qutest direct from my mobile powerbank and, from a semi-brief comparison with the same track on a loop what I seemed to notice was perhaps better defined drums and more distinct individual instruments within the sound field and maybe even more organic overall. Not any thorough or scientific comparison so I could be off here, but I would be interested in any more affordable option than the USB Sbooster if any available. It does sound good with the original wall wart still.


----------



## GreenBow (Apr 29, 2020)

gasmonkey said:


> I have read through Rob's opinion on the stock wall wart being sufficient, a battery eliminating any problems that may exist in the home power supply, the Qutest having galvanic isolation, and an unplugged laptop being ideal as well.
> 
> I generally agree with everything Rob says. Certainly an unplugged laptop is King so far. But power wise I do have to disagree. I tried battery packs, and they were ok/good/not much of a difference as compared to plugging into the wall. I did however NOT find any kind of battery power that was ideal. The battery Rob suggests in unobtainium, and I cannot find a battery that is native 5V, not 3.7v noisily switched to 5V.
> 
> ...



One of the UK HiFi said that changing PSU improved the Qutest.

I have been tempted to try the iFi Power purifiers.

However ages I bought an iFi USB mini something gadget, with a clean 5V power source on it. After a quick test I heard zero difference.


In theory if we can clean up USB cable rails with Jitterbug which works. Then we should be able to clean the power rails on the 5V supply similarly.

However there was a post in the 2Go thread recently that might be of more interest to you. @Currawong found that noise affecting the Hugo 2, was not coming from the PSU and into the Hugo 2. That PSU is said to be RFI treated anyway. The noise was going out of the Hugo 2 PSU, and into the mains and then into an amplifier power supply. An amplfier used for driving speakers.

I think there may be a conclusion that using filter power blocks helps. I have two six socket filtered supplies, because I read they worked. However I never tested and got reduced RFI with any power cleaning tests I did. Either way though, I would love to try the SBooster.


----------



## OctavianH

Anyone compared Sbooster with the LPS made by MCRU?


----------



## DecentLevi

OctavianH said:


> LPS made by MCRU


Hi Octavian, I know you. Do you also have the Qutest? I got mine used last week and am astounded how well it does every genre and every headphone! I looked on the MCRU site but they have so many mains products. Which one were you referring to?


----------



## 474194 (Apr 29, 2020)

Loving the power supply talk, although I have zero knowledge about the Qutest.

I'm an off the grid, portable and transportable listener but once the Hugo2 or Mojo's battery R.I.P.s in a few years I'm going to try out some Ciunas Power Supply's for desktop use (the DAC battery will be completely removed from chain).  I'm also glass optical only and have zero USB data involvement of any kind in my chain for SQ purity.  Pure i2S.  So with battery power being so robust these days, I would not even consider mains.  But these are just personal requirements.  YMMV as I'm not into desktop setups, esp main power supplies or even mains music streamers.

This is where Ciunas Power Supply's come into play.  The ISO-PS Supercapacitor can be powered by a PowerAdd Pilot Pro 2.  So you can have one PP2 on standby (possibly charging) and another PP2 in use so you can have a nice rotation without losing a step.

https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/copy-of-supercapacitor-power-supply-dual-voltage-outputs

There are a few comments from another Forum of the Qutest here (maybe best to read whole thread if it draws your interest):

1

2

3

I plan on dual voltage.  One 5V going into my portable music streamer and one 7V going into Mojo or Hugo2 (Haven't verified if it accepts 7V directly yet).  Plan on something like the below (SUPER-PS + SUPER-PS [fed from battery]), but Music Streamer + DAC, not Music Streamer + RPi since once you feed the Music Streamer 5V direct it will also power the RPi:






Supercapacitor Power Supply tour

To top off some Ghent Audio DC Gotham cables (5 layers of shielding) would be pretty sweet.  I have the Gotham USB micro for USB power only (No USB Data soldered) for now.

http://ghentaudio.com/part/dc-gac4.html


----------



## daredevil_kk

DecentLevi said:


> Hi Octavian, I know you. Do you also have the Qutest? I got mine used last week and am astounded how well it does every genre and every headphone! I looked on the MCRU site but they have so many mains products. Which one were you referring to?


I second the MCRU, I am using it as well. They have one specially made for the Qutest. Use the search function.


----------



## gasmonkey

DecentLevi said:


> Quite helpful info. thanks. When you said you plugged the Qutest into a power isolator, do you mean you plugged the wall-wart into something like a power regenerator or power conditioner? For me, my wall-wart has been plugged into my Furman IT REF 15I Power Conditioner all along. I assumed this may not make a difference with the Qutest, being that the power to it is still switched from AC to DC within the wall-wart. When I get home I will try connecting my Qutest into a mobile power bank, but hopefully that won't cause too much of a surge or anything? It's definitely 5 volts, but it may / may not be one or two AH higher than what it needs.
> 
> Also, do you mind to post the link for which thread that was, which you said they were talking about the merits to creating clean DC power?
> 
> Also @jbarrentine you said you didn't hear a difference with the iFi iPower into the DAC. I was curious what is your chain? Which hadphones, amp, and do you listen to well mastered lossless audio files? Not saying the power purifier must make an audible difference, just that perhaps your gear was affecting the ability to notice it.



Here is the Thread.

I have one single Power Isolator that connects to the wall, and everything is run off that. Keeps a physical disconnect from the mains, and then has two separate outlets of 2 plugins. I run my Amplifier off one set, and Chord Qutest from the other. Laptop runs on battery exclusively. I then traded the stock Qutest power supply with the Sbooster and it gets plugged into the Power Isolator. 

I have had great success keepign my chain small, and not allowing anything to have a physical connection to the Mains. It's all cut off in the Power isolator. If I plug the laptop into the wall, I instantly get a degradation of SQ.



GreenBow said:


> One of the UK HiFi said that changing PSU improved the Qutest.
> 
> I have been tempted to try the iFi Power purifiers.
> 
> However ages I bought an iFi USB mini something gadget, with a clean 5V power source on it. After a quick test I heard zero difference.



I would be very surprised if they made much of a difference. Then again, I was surprised with my purchase. The way I look at it is this: Most everything is priced about cost x3. When Rob says the stock wall wart is sufficient, I'm sure he means its about as good as can be for whatever the budget is, $15x3, $25x3, $50x3. And that's good for most people. You have already paid this price when purchasing the Chord Qutest. To think that another engineer can take $33 in parts and make a $100 product that improves enough to make a large difference on what Rob has done does seem quite far fetched, otherwise Chord would have spent the extra money and just tacked another $50 onto the MSRP.

In Battle of the cost effective Engineers, I'm going to guess Rob wins. 

But when money is no object, its pretty unfair to compare the budget constrained Qutest stock wall wart to a product that has an engineering budget of 10x what Rob had to work with. (all figures are my personal guesses).


----------



## OctavianH

DecentLevi said:


> Hi Octavian, I know you. Do you also have the Qutest? I got mine used last week and am astounded how well it does every genre and every headphone! I looked on the MCRU site but they have so many mains products. Which one were you referring to?



Yes, I use at the moment Qutest (already almost 3 years) and I had in the past the 2Qute. I used on both power supplies made by MCRU which were much better than the stock one. Now I have this one:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/MCRU-FULLY-REGULATED-LINEAR-POWER-SUPPLY-FOR-CHORD-QUTEST-DAC-/352301203081


----------



## DecentLevi

AC-12 said:


> Loving the power supply talk, although I have zero knowledge about the Qutest.
> 
> I'm an off the grid, portable and transportable listener but once the Hugo2 or Mojo's battery R.I.P.s in a few years I'm going to try out some Ciunas Power Supply's for desktop use (the DAC battery will be completely removed from chain).  I'm also glass optical only and have zero USB data involvement of any kind in my chain for SQ purity.  Pure i2S.  So with battery power being so robust these days, I would not even consider mains.  But these are just personal requirements.  YMMV as I'm not into desktop setups, esp main power supplies or even mains music streamers.
> 
> ...


Wow that looks like a quality and affordable choice. It took me a while do catch on to your lingo / acronyms... and a good thing about this option is the flexibility to pair it with different devices with a generic output. But do you know anyone who has received good results on this with it (Supercapacitor ISO-PS) on the Qutest?


----------



## DecentLevi

OctavianH said:


> Yes, I use at the moment Qutest (already almost 3 years) and I had in the past the 2Qute. I used on both power supplies made by MCRU which were much better than the stock one. Now I have this one:
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/MCRU-FULLY-REGULATED-LINEAR-POWER-SUPPLY-FOR-CHORD-QUTEST-DAC-/352301203081


This looks like a solid option! I love the fact that it's British made and award winning and has 2 separate regulators (one for AC and one for DC if I understand correctly)

From looking at the MCRU website they have these two options:
MCRU Linear Power Supply for Chord Qutest DAC for £195.83
MCRU Ultimate Linear Power Supply for Chord Qutest DAC for £541.67

And Wow! The one you linked to on eBay looks like it's the more expensive Ultimate Linear PS and says it's for only £235! But it says a Fully Regulated Linear PS so I'm not really sure which of the two above it is, or if it's another I didn't see on their website?
And if you tried both of the above options, would you have any words on if one sounds better than the other?


----------



## OctavianH

I have the cheaper one, the "Ultimate" has some cable/connector/fuse upgrades only. I never tried it. From Ebay the difference is:



> THIS MODEL COMES WITH THE FOLLOWING UP-GRADES AS STANDARD......
> Pure silver cable from small case to micro usb connector
> Furutech gold plated IEC inlet
> Synergistic research SR20 internal fuse
> IsoTek EVO3 Initium power cable



Normal:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MCRU-FUL...OWER-SUPPLY-FOR-CHORD-QUTEST-DAC/352301203081
Ultimate:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MCRU-ULT...OWER-SUPPLY-FOR-CHORD-QUTEST-DAC/153003927244


----------



## gasmonkey

Recently I decided that I should look potentially replacing my laptop with an audiophile grade solution. This is when I started smashing my head against the wall. My main issue that complicated everything is that the Router is upstairs with the neighbors, and I dont have a hardwired connection. Truth is, I don't need one. But most products seem to think I do because they dont want to deal with customer support when the wifi drops signal. I rarely stream from Qobuz, and mostly have ripped CD's, so I only need wifi to retrieve coverart and control Roon from my phone.

I stream FLAC from ROON, not quite bitperfect as I use the volume control.

Here is my list of pluses/minuses for my current setup:

Plus: modern laptop (more efficient = smaller power usage = smaller noise?), battery powered, keeps physical disconnect from mains, SSD.
Cons: Full windows software, probably made worse by Dell. Can't play sample rates of 48k, 96k, 192k. Only 44.1k, 88.2k, and not certain about 176.4 yet, though certainly some failures. This is a Dell firmware issue relating to audio and the BIOS. It's a nightmare, but if I stick to Redbook, I get perfect results. No Optical. Powerful, but has fan. Hardware for display is unnecessary.

Here are some solutions I have considered:

Roon Nucleus:
Pro's: case is heatsink, no fan. Minimalist optimized OS. Physical components optimized.
Con's: ABSOLUTELY requires a hardwired network cable to the router. Would need to pay to run this wire, and then the router is not audiophile grade, and reconnects my entire system to the Mains of the house, letting in noise from the router and every other piece of electronics on the block.

Small Green Computer Sonic Transporter I5:
Pro's: Hardware and minimalist OS built for SQ. Linear Power supply can plug into power isolator, keeping entire system disconnected from dirty power from mains (if wifi dongle can work)
Con's: No optical. Hardware for display is compromise. No wifi, may need to connect to router.

Which brings me to the relevant comments I have found in this thread:



Rob Watts said:


> Yes optical data is transmitted through light only, so no electrical connection at all. It's the perfect galvanic isolation, as the coupling capacitance is almost zero.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, all electrical connections from a digital source will have RF noise on the ground. Even if it is galvanically isolated, there is still a coupling capacitance, which degrades the isolation at higher frequencies (particularly in the GHz range).





musickid said:


> if the optical source is bit perfect then the source makes no difference. this was confirmed by the designer of qutest Rob. No audible difference at all. external mutec type clocking will harm chord dac operation. its also best to go direct from source to chord dac and avoid ddc's etc. i use my imac optical into mscaler. the key point is that the source must be bit perfect this is essential. also digital phase lock loop make chord dacs immune to jitter. it saves us a lot of money very good.





MagnusH said:


> I like toslink for its simplicity and galvanic isolation. Its possible to get USB isolated but it requires an ethernet transport and fiber-ethernet, and then the ethernet transport has to be well made so it don't produce any electronic noise. All in all, it tends to get expensive (for example, upcoming $1300 opticalRendu). If toslink gives same sound quality, I would prefer that since I have computer one meter away.
> 
> I don't listen to anything above 192 kHz anyway, so I won't miss the higher bandwidths.





x RELIC x said:


> It’s not the jitter on the USB for 2 reasons. One, the USB timing is asynchronous, meaning the timing comes from the DAC so there should be zero jitter. Two, Rob’s designs are jitter immune on all inputs due to the Pulse Array design. Likely you are hearing the difference from RF noise being injected in to the analogue components with USB making it sound brighter. As you rightly mentioned the optical is electrically isolated so does not transmit the RF noise so this is the most likely reason why it sounds darker, as Rob has explained many times.





MagnusH said:


> Ethernet cables transport electronic noise as well, which will affect the sound. So that "theory" they keep talking about is not very accurate. Unlike USBAudio or SPDIF, there is no audio-jitter in ethernet though (the information transported is not tied to a clock), which means that the quality of ethernet cables is not as important as for USB.



Ok. Here is what I take away: 
For USB/Qutest, timing is not an issue, and there is galvanic isolation, BUT, the galvonic isolation isn't perfect. Noise from laptop could be making it into Qutest and degrading SQ. 
For Optical: Timing is not an issue, and neither is noise.

Is it really this simple? If the theory truly fits real life, then all anyone needs is any laptop and some device that takes a USB signal and converts it to optical. No amount of money can get better audio out of Qutest?

Is there something inexpensive that will do this?

What am I missing?

It seems just a touch too simple to be true when all the other solutions I look at are many thousands of dollars (like this: https://www.smallgreencomputer.com/...transporter-i9-optical?variant=31098467156037)


----------



## DecentLevi (May 1, 2020)

Super helpful for your insights folks! I may be 'pulling the trigger' soon on one of those filtered power options for the Qutest. For me the choices seem like this. Either the

MCRU Linear Power Supply


or Ciunas Audio Supercapacitor ISO-PS


However in my case I already have the Furman IT Reference 15i discrete symmetrical power filer


Being that my above unit already filters the AC power, I'm wondering if that would negate the need for the two separate regulators of the MCRU power supply, making the Ciunas Audio solution more practical in my case - or if it's somehow better than the MCRU? Maybe So @AC-12 or @OctavianH or anyone has any thoughts. Thanks!


----------



## Meanstreak242

gasmonkey said:


> Recently I decided that I should look potentially replacing my laptop with an audiophile grade solution. This is when I started smashing my head against the wall. My main issue that complicated everything is that the Router is upstairs with the neighbors, and I dont have a hardwired connection. Truth is, I don't need one. But most products seem to think I do because they dont want to deal with customer support when the wifi drops signal. I rarely stream from Qobuz, and mostly have ripped CD's, so I only need wifi to retrieve coverart and control Roon from my phone.
> 
> I stream FLAC from ROON, not quite bitperfect as I use the volume control.
> 
> ...



Have you considered a wireless ethernet bridge?   Then you can just connect that to the wifi, and ethernet cable from the unit to whatever it is you want to connect to.


----------



## gasmonkey

It's a not so perfect, inelegant solution. Could be done though. That would put a Roon Nucleus into play (Which should be a perfect device short of ditching USB and going optical), but with this AND a wifi device I'm now out of Power slots, and one of my devices has to share a 2 set of power slots with the crappy wifi adaptor, which could send back noise through the power isolator and into Amp/qutest/Nucleus.

It still leaves the question if a Roon Nucleus will provide better SQ than a laptop. Theoretically it should, but that route is expensive and then Im adding in a cheap non-audiohpile component. Would be a last resort as its 4 compromises: USB solution for top dollar/cheap adaptor/extra power slot used/power slot used by non-audiophile device.


----------



## 474194 (Apr 30, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Super helpful for your insights folks! I may be 'pulling the trigger' soon on one of those filtered power options for the Qutest.



I'll try paging @aspro .  @aspro  : can you comment on the below?  Did you end up making a purchase?  Did it make a difference with your Music Streamer?





The only power-related comments for aspro:

https://www.head-fi.org/search/759330/?q=power&c[users]=aspro&o=relevance

I recommend contacting the owner of Ciunas.  He seems super helpful on the threads, so might provide some insight.  Of course bias, but seems like an expert in the field:

skype:john.f.kenny@ciunas.biz?call

john.f.kenny@ciunas.biz

For me, I'm just planning on obsolesce in a few years so can't comment on desktop solutions as that's a whole new world of power options.  After reading RW teachings, I try for the path of least resistance.  For example, my digital source is PCM -> CPU -> i2s -> WM8804 Optical decoder -> glass optical -> Chord DAC.  That and battery power is all that's needed for a simple elegant solution.  I'm running the exact same software as the $10,000 music streamers w/ an audiophile OS that runs entirely in RAM.  RW preaches simple battery power and noise-free sources.  His preference I believe is a Motorola phone, but that's not practical.  I'm not sure what he preaches on the power side.  Summit-Fi users like USB -> Optical -> USB -> 128 core CPU -> Coaxial -> USB -> Ethernet -> Optical -> USB -> Chord DAC.  Sprinkled in with some ferrites.  Complexity is what I avoid not run to...

With the Supercapacitor, I believe there is no voltage regulator in the way.  It's just super clean if fed from a battery.  I'm considering now powering with the Ciunas *LiFePO4* power supply with standby LiFePO4 batteries in rotation. LiFePO4 PS -> ISO-PS -> Chord DAC vs PP2 -> ISO-PS -> Chord DAC. Both the LiFePO4 and ISO-PS provide on-demand dynamic power.


> The important feature in all these PS designs is that there is NO voltage regulator between the supercapacitors & the output - the current is delivered directly from the supercapacitors which makes a large difference to the sound when powering devices in the audio chain. It's a growing realisation that voltage regultaors (even the best ones) react to dynamic current draws (becaus eof their feedback method of voltag eregulation). The largest improvement in audibility is found when supercapacitors *directly *power audio devices themselves such as DACs, etc but it also seems to have a audible benefit powering any device in the audio chain.



Since the TT2 has a Supercapcitor power supply, I thought it would go well with Chord DACs.  But as RW pointed out, Supercapacitor is only good for speakers:





I did not pursue if connecting power directly to the DAC and not the USB port is limited/restricted, but there's hope as there is this comment:





Large dynamics swings are what the Supercapacitor and LiFePO4 are all about.  Super clean power with dynamism.  That's why TT2 has one.

I do want to try to experiment with a Supercapacitor power supply in a few years, but for now it's not needed as I'm portable CIEM only.  Although have thoughts of Supercapacitor + Qutest for car audio speakers in the future.  I'm just not a stationary listener yet.

IMO, with Chord DACs you have to think simple, battery-power, glass optical, path of least resistance and maybe add NO voltage regulator to the list.  Adding complexity to compensate with traditional DACs doesn't apply to Chord DACs.  Chord DACs don't need to compensate.  Just need simplicity.


----------



## DecentLevi

@AC-12 Awesome thanks for your advice. I'll try & contact the owner of Ciunas about the Supercapacitor ISO-PS. But I think I'm sold on it. The supercapacitor concept may benefit speakers, but has certainly said to be beneficial by some for the Qutest (thanks for your links), as well as in other source components I've read about having one like the Singxer SU-6 DDC / audio bridge. If no voltage regulator, no problem, and I don't think I necessarily need to mess with running it from batteries if since I use a power conditioner. I could be wrong that's just my current understanding.

And I take it you have yet to try the ISO-PS, right?


----------



## blueninjasix

DecentLevi said:


> Super helpful for your insights folks! I may be 'pulling the trigger' soon on one of those filtered power options for the Qutest. For me the choices seem like this. Either the
> 
> MCRU Linear Power Supply
> 
> ...



Don't forget to check out the Allo Shanti. The 5v 1.2a rail works with Qutest.


----------



## uzi2 (May 1, 2020)

blueninjasix said:


> Don't forget to check out the Allo Shanti. The 5v 1.2a rail works with Qutest.


Wouldn't you be better to use the 3A output as The Qutest specs state a minimum 2A power supply? The 1.2A is more than sufficient for the clean power of the Allo DigiOne Signature.
Correction - I don't know where I got min 2A from - it is min 1A


----------



## blueninjasix

It works fine on the 1amp rail - and I'm using the 3amp rail already to power the USBridge Signature


----------



## 474194 (May 1, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> @AC-12 Awesome thanks for your advice. I'll try & contact the owner of Ciunas about the Supercapacitor ISO-PS. But I think I'm sold on it. The supercapacitor concept may benefit speakers, but has certainly said to be beneficial by some for the Qutest (thanks for your links), as well as in other source components I've read about having one like the Singxer SU-6 DDC / audio bridge. If no voltage regulator, no problem, and I don't think I necessarily need to mess with running it from batteries if since I use a power conditioner. I could be wrong that's just my current understanding.
> 
> And I take it you have yet to try the ISO-PS, right?



Yes, I was just throwing out another option not a recommendation.  For me, I would want the flexibility to use mains or battery power for all my audio devices going forward.  That's what makes the Qutest and TT2 so attractive as your power options are not limited to mains-only.  Pls do your due diligence.  I understand the excitement after the brain burns-in with the Chord sound.

The ISO-PS is my current primary plan once my 3 month old Mojo's battery goes kapult and is out of warranty.  Instead of purchasing a $75 battery for the Mojo, I'm going this route as an alternative.  I also want to experiment with the ISO-PS to power my digital source as it seems to make a difference on other digital sources.  Instead of the traditional LPS mains like the photo below, I want to go the Supercapacitor route.






I'll check out Singxer SU-6 DDC / audio bridge over the weekend.

Yes, with your Furman IT Reference 15i the Supercapacitor should work fine.  RW mentioned something along the line of "wanting to remove the effects of the mains PSU" so I'm assuming Supercapacitor filters or shields from what mains power supply you feed the ISO-PS.  Maybe something to bring up to JK.

I think I read you can get $25 off the the ISO-PS if it does not include the SMPS.  There are alternative SMPSs here:

Supercapacitor Power Supply tour

Doesn't hurt to see if their is a discount as well.

I forget there is also a 5-10 minute warm up with the Supercapacitor to store the dynamic energy.

This thread seems similar but it's a parallel "tour" thread so may want to go through this whole thread:

Supercapacitor Power Supply tour













I do love tight bass, but that's just preference...

Edit:  I'll edit later on tonight if there's something I missed.  GTG.


----------



## DecentLevi

@AC-12 thanks much for your advice above. I've already been in contact with the owner of Ciunas Audio and it's seeming pretty promising. He even says the current version has two outputs for more than one device. And by SCPSU, are they referreing to the Ciunas Audio ISO-PS?


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hey guys!

I am almost ready to pull the trigger on a MRCU psu for my Qutest,based on the limited positive reviews I am reading...

Any last minute recommendations or opposings?


----------



## DecentLevi (May 2, 2020)

Zzt231gr said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> I am almost ready to pull the trigger on a MRCU psu for my Qutest,based on the limited positive reviews I am reading...
> 
> Any last minute recommendations or opposings?


Yes although I've tried neither, I actually recommend you to the other hot LPS we've been talking about here, the ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio. I think @AC-12 could fill you on on the benefits of using a supercapacitor, and you can go over his recent posts about it on the last 2 pages here. And if possible AC 12... would you mind to dumb it down just a little? PLEASE?! I've a feeling you're deserting some of us here with the sophisticated tech lingo until we can't really understand what you're trying to say. I really appreciate your insights though, don't get me wrong! And I've been in touch with the owner of Ciunas Audio and he said tomorrow he'll update the webpage with new photos of the newer version which has dual outputs for two devices. Here's the site again:
https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/copy-of-supercapacitor-power-supply-dual-voltage-outputs


----------



## OctavianH

Such a Ciunas Audio *dual* power supply of 15V might do a good job on TT2 + M-Scaler making you use only one for both. I am curious if anyone tried it on such a setup.


----------



## Triode User

OctavianH said:


> Such a Ciunas Audio *dual* power supply of 15V might do a good job on TT2 + M-Scaler making you use only one for both. I am curious if anyone tried it on such a setup.



From experience of a different make of power supply I definitely cannot recommend powering the mscaler and the chord dac from dual outputs on the same power supply.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Zzt231gr said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> I am almost ready to pull the trigger on a MRCU psu for my Qutest,based on the limited positive reviews I am reading...
> 
> Any last minute recommendations or opposings?


Ok-I just bought it!

My system is super analytical so I think the difference will be easily detectable.

If things go wrong,I can return it...


----------



## OctavianH

Zzt231gr said:


> Ok-I just bought it!
> 
> My system is super analytical so I think the difference will be easily detectable.
> 
> If things go wrong,I can return it...



Which one?


----------



## Zzt231gr

OctavianH said:


> Which one?


MCRU FULLY REGULATED LINEAR POWER SUPPLY FOR CHORD QUTEST DAC

Ebay description.


----------



## OctavianH

I hope you'll enjoy it. Mine sits there between my amp and the Qutest:






I replaced the power cable with a Supra one when I replaced all my power cables. So that's the grey one there.


----------



## Zzt231gr

OctavianH said:


> I hope you'll enjoy it. Mine sits there between my amp and the Qutest:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you dear friend!I see you play with CXC,too!

It was one of your comments that made me try this MCRU.

BTW how do you deal with the long DC cables of this psu?Did you leave them hanging down straight below your rack or did you round them up coiled near the devices?Any sonic impact on the second method?


----------



## OctavianH (May 2, 2020)

Honestly I left them hanging and never cared about it. Should it make some difference?

PS. I think I replied to the previous post by mistake.


----------



## Zzt231gr

OctavianH said:


> I hope you'll enjoy it. Mine sits there between my amp and the Qutest:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you dear friend!I see you play with CXC,too!

It was one of your comments that made me try this MCRU.

BTW how do you deal with the long DC cables of this psu?Did you leave them hanging down straight below your rack or did you round them up coiled near the devices?Any sonic impact on the second method?


----------



## 474194 (May 2, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> @AC-12 thanks much for your advice above. I've already been in contact with the owner of Ciunas Audio and it's seeming pretty promising. He even says the current version has two outputs for more than one device. And by SCPSU, are they referreing to the Ciunas Audio ISO-PS?



No worries.  Remember, it's just a suggestion and I'm usually off the beaten path in this hobby.  So tread carefully.  I don't follow the herd, but sometimes it's better to play if safe and follow the herd as others may have success in traditional LPS solutions.  But the SC seems like a good balance of value, performance, flexibility and dynamism.

That's great if you can pick JK's brain if he can tell you his thoughts on SC vs LPS.





With the statement above, I think I'm going to give up on the LiFePO4 idea to power the SC and just focus on the SC.  SC has lower impedance and faster than the already awesome A123 LifePO4 batteries irrespective if they are mains or battery powered.









I have to look into the dual voltage option.  For the SC, it seems the new models are "isolated" so you have dual outputs with no voltage regulator.  For the LiFePO4 power supply, only the single output is direct from the battery.  The dual output has a voltage regulator.  Will need to confirm this is not the case for the SC.





Another issue I didn't consider was the USB power port of the Qutest.  For the Mojo, I plan to convert to DC @ 7V so there's no bottleneck:





I think it's fine not a deal breaker if you get a decent HQ DC cable and have it terminated on one end with USB micro connector.  These HQ DC cables should be at least rated 2.4A if not 3A from GhentAudio:

http://ghentaudio.com/part/list-dc.html

I don't think a standard USB cable terminated with DC will work well, so you my have to consider a HQ DC cable in this scenario.

I guess your right about a new dual voltage out soon:





link

Yes, same.  SCPSU was used early 2019 during the tour.  Once the product was official, it was labeled ISO-PS.  There's ISO-PS Supercapacitor (new) and ISO-PS LiFEPO4 (old).


----------



## 474194

DecentLevi said:


> Yes although I've tried neither, I actually recommend you to the other hot LPS we've been talking about here, the ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio. I think @AC-12 could fill you on on the benefits of using a supercapacitor, and you can go over his recent posts about it on the last 2 pages here. And if possible AC 12... would you mind to dumb it down just a little? PLEASE?! I've a feeling you're deserting some of us here with the sophisticated tech lingo until we can't really understand what you're trying to say. I really appreciate your insights though, don't get me wrong! And I've been in touch with the owner of Ciunas Audio and he said tomorrow he'll update the webpage with new photos of the newer version which has dual outputs for two devices. Here's the site again:
> https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/copy-of-supercapacitor-power-supply-dual-voltage-outputs



I think he already made a purchase.  He's already ahead of the game as I think he's a fellow Lifatec Glass Optician so he good.


----------



## Zzt231gr

OctavianH said:


> Honestly I left them hanging and never cared about it. Should it make some difference?


If the cable forms a coil,theoretically this gives it extra inductance and it may negatively affect sonic quality.


AC-12 said:


> I think he already made a purchase.  He's already ahead of the game as I think he's a fellow Lifatec Glass Optician so he good.


Yes I did and I will inform you of the outcome.I decided to try the safer and more practical route...

And I am in the Lifatec Club,sir!Honest and worthwile upgrade!


----------



## OctavianH

Zzt231gr said:


> And I am in the Lifatec Club,sir!Honest and worthwile upgrade!



I use between the CXC and Qutest a QED Reference Quartz but I am curious about the Lifatec. The only problem was that they are sold only from US and I was to lazy to order overseas.


----------



## Zzt231gr

OctavianH said:


> I use between the CXC and Qutest a QED Reference Quartz but I am curious about the Lifatec. The only problem was that they are sold only from US and I was to lazy to order overseas.


I ordered mine via a distant relative in US and I got rid of local customs...

About the PSU;do you leave it on 24/7 like the stock one?Powering the Qutest?


----------



## OctavianH (May 4, 2020)

Zzt231gr said:


> About the PSU;do you leave it on 24/7 like the stock one?Powering the Qutest?



Yes, it is powered all the time (it does not have an on/off switch either). Qutest does not have to be stopped, works perfectly always on.


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (May 4, 2020)

OctavianH said:


> I use between the CXC and Qutest a QED Reference Quartz but I am curious about the Lifatec. The only problem was that they are sold only from US and I was to lazy to order overseas.



I am in the UK and have the acclaimed Sysconcept from Canada, great supporting 24/192 and cheaper than Lifatec but not glass. I will try the QED glass you have though soon as think based on Hi-fi World reviews and measurement / spec that may be among the best performance to value ratio for us in the EU at least... Will report when I had a chance to compare but  the difference will probably be quite small.

Edit: Supra ZAC Optical Cable apparently supports 32/384 so may try that to see if I can get higher sampling rates 😎


----------



## gasmonkey

Paul Bjernklo said:


> I am in the UK and have the acclaimed Sysconcept from Canada, great supporting 24/192 and cheaper than Lifatec but not glass. I will try the QED glass you have though soon as think based on Hi-fi World reviews and measurement / spec that may be among the best performance to value ratio for us in the EU at least... Will report when I had a chance to compare but  the difference will probably be quite small.
> 
> Edit: Supra ZAC Optical Cable apparently supports 32/384 so may try that to see if I can get higher sampling rates 😎



Must be fun playing with high-end Glass cables. A technological step up, and the high end cables are dirt cheap compared to other type cables. I think Im going to end up in this game in the future.


----------



## uzi2

Paul Bjernklo said:


> I am in the UK and have the acclaimed Sysconcept from Canada, great supporting 24/192 and cheaper than Lifatec but not glass. I will try the QED glass you have though soon as think based on Hi-fi World reviews and measurement / spec that may be among the best performance to value ratio for us in the EU at least... Will report when I had a chance to compare but  the difference will probably be quite small.
> 
> Edit: Supra ZAC Optical Cable apparently supports 32/384 so may try that to see if I can get higher sampling rates 😎


My experience with optical cables is that they either work or they don't. There is no degree of good and bad in between. This is for 24/192. The limitation with glass, won't be the cable, but the transmitter and receiver at either end of it. I doubt you will have success at anything higher than 24/192, but good luck...


----------



## OctavianH

Honestly a few minutes ago I switched my QED Reference Quartz with a generic cable I just found at home for comparison and the difference was night and day. Same components, same player, same track (FLAC 16 bit 441.KHz) so what to say.


----------



## uzi2

OctavianH said:


> Honestly a few minutes ago I switched my QED Reference Quartz with a generic cable I just found at home for comparison and the difference was night and day. Same components, same player, same track (FLAC 16 bit 441.KHz) so what to say.


I don't think "night and day" was what you wanted to say I can understand that there are differences to be heard with USB an coax cables of various qualities as shielding from RF noise is a big issue, but optical should be immune from this. What were the differences you heard and what do you think is the cause?


----------



## OctavianH

You are right, I added a little bit of "theatrical exageration" but I would say there was a 20% difference in details, extension on high frequencies (the cheap cable was sounding "muffled") and dynamics. The overall clarity was worse, like for example grainier and the bass was not so punchy and clean. I am not trying to convince anyone, not even myself, I own both cables, just sayin'...


----------



## uzi2

OctavianH said:


> You are right, I added a little bit of "theatrical exageration" but I would say there was a 20% difference in details, extension on high frequencies (the cheap cable was sounding "muffled") and dynamics. The overall clarity was worse, like for example grainier and the bass was not so punchy and clean. I am not trying to convince anyone, not even myself, I own both cables, just sayin'...


Yes, I thought my description of either it works or it doesn't was more akin to night and day, especially in the optical sense
I'm not doubting your experience, but I have not heard a similar thing widely stated with optical and I am fully aware that placebo is a very powerful effect. Clearly you will be keeping the QEDs connected in future and be very happy that you did...


----------



## Clemmaster

Bits are bits! Light pulses are light pulses! Everything's perfect! 

Oh wait, no, physics still applies...


----------



## Paul Bjernklo

uzi2 said:


> Yes, I thought my description of either it works or it doesn't was more akin to night and day, especially in the optical sense
> I'm not doubting your experience, but I have not heard a similar thing widely stated with optical and I am fully aware that placebo is a very powerful effect. Clearly you will be keeping the QEDs connected in future and be very happy that you did...



I can also hear an improvement of clarity (not brighter but better) compared to really basic optical cables. But then again there are cheap very well made cables like Kabeldirekt optical cables (which I normally recommend) where to be honest I am not so sure I can hear a difference but I still like to experiment 😎


----------



## uzi2

Paul Bjernklo said:


> I can also hear an improvement of clarity (not brighter but better) compared to really basic optical cables. But then again there are cheap very well made cables like Kabeldirekt optical cables (which I normally recommend) where to be honest I am not so sure I can hear a difference but I still like to experiment 😎


Wouldn't it be great to know why?


----------



## greenblured

uzi2 said:


> Wouldn't it be great to know why?


Yea, what would be really interesting is hard facts re. the opticals conections in transports and dac. Not the cable.


----------



## 474194 (May 5, 2020)

Paul Bjernklo said:


> Edit: Supra ZAC Optical Cable apparently supports 32/384 so may try that to see if I can get higher sampling rates 😎



While I'm all for technological progress, I don't think 32/384 will ever be supported on the software driver and transceiver end since optical is a legacy tech.

I tried DXD PCM files (352) and my player I believe just downsamples to 192.  It plays fine and well, but the Chord button color on the Hugo2 displayed 192.  Of course I was hoping this wasn't true as it was playing fine, but after looking at the hardware, software code and Chord button color; 192 reality set in....

IMO, glass optical has lifelike, neutral and natural qualities.  The type of signature I pursue.  It also retains USB's crispness without USB's harshness.  Not to mention the pure noise-free black deep abyss black background. 














https://statics.cirrus.com/pubs/proBulletin/WM8804_WM8805_ProductFlyer.pdf


----------



## 474194 (May 5, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> @AC-12 thanks much for your advice above. I've already been in contact with the owner of Ciunas Audio and it's seeming pretty promising. He even says the current version has two outputs for more than one device. And by SCPSU, are they referreing to the Ciunas Audio ISO-PS?



I did some more digging and found a teardown of another Ciunas product.

ASR

It maybe time to play it safe with a traditional LPS...  Looks like QC issues on the second hand Ciunas DAC product.

It's cool though someone has this setup in the past:

https://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649535818-chord-qutest-dac-plus-supercapacitor-power-supply/

It's a tough call as the SQ aspect seems to be there:





AS

but with the teardown photos, QC issues is usually a red flag...


----------



## HumanMedia

I guess many of you are in the UK so favour the Ciunus product, but not far away are some of the best supercapacitor supplies on the planet, the Farad3. Sound great with Chord products and are designed never to go over voltage even if the regulators fail down the track. No quality issues there. I have two and love them.

https://faradpowersupplies.com/


----------



## 474194

HumanMedia said:


> I guess many of you are in the UK so favour the Ciunus product, but not far away are some of the best supercapacitor supplies on the planet, the Farad3. Sound great with Chord products and are designed never to go over voltage even if the regulators fail down the track. No quality issues there. I have two and love them.
> 
> https://faradpowersupplies.com/



I'm near Disneyland.  Not so much in favour of Ciunus, but I have yet to see another pure Supercapacitor option available.  There's LPS w/ SC output (hybrid) like the Farad3 and Shanti, but not pure 100% SC.  I remember Farad Capacitors from car audio amplifiers so nice to see it mentioned.





AS

I guess SC is too cutting edge at this time to have different purchasing options:





DIY

Nice to see someone mention the Gotham DC cable:





AS2


----------



## DecentLevi (May 6, 2020)

AC 12 well I guess I'm not sure anymore about the Ciunas Audio ISO-PS option because of the teardown report you linked from ASR. Though to be fair there was a very good explanation on the 2nd post justifying the design reasons for its' appearance. However the Allo Shanti option is well reviewed and endorsed wider than the Ciunas products, and has also measured very well and seems possibly safer. What did you mean about "not pure 100% SC"? The Shanti website says the final power comes from the supercapacitors on the output. Even save for that, it sure was received well on the other forums you linked.


----------



## 474194

DecentLevi said:


> AC 12 well I guess I'm not sure anymore about the Ciunas Audio ISO-PS option because of the teardown report you linked from ASR. Though to be fair there was a very good explanation on the 2nd post justifying the design reasons for its' appearance. However the Allo Shanti option is well reviewed and endorsed wider than the Ciunas products, and has also measured very well and seems possibly safer. What did you mean about "not pure 100% SC"? The Shanti website says the final power comes from the supercapacitors on the output. Even save for that, it sure was received well on the other forums you linked.



Okay, glad you did not hit the submit button on the purchase.  I was worried you already placed an order.  It's tough, everything screams solid product but durability, safety and QC now comes into play.  Maybe you can ask the owner about the SC output on LPS devices compared to his SC product?  I'll check back over the weekend, long week...

Some of RW posts state there is no RFI filtering on LPS.  Isn't it better looking into SMPS-rolling which has at least some RFI filtering?  Haven't looked into SMPS units yet...


----------



## uzi2

Inspired by @Reactcore posts I had to try my planar headphones direct. HQPlayer has a really smooth digital volume control, so it all works well


----------



## HumanMedia (May 7, 2020)

AC-12 said:


> Some of RW posts state there is no RFI filtering on LPS.  Isn't it better looking into SMPS-rolling which has at least some RFI filtering?  Haven't looked into SMPS units yet...



I’m sure it was more of a blanket statement to cover many cheap LPS that people would get off eBay. I remember quite a few people on forums thinking that if they spent $50 on an EBay LPS it would surely be better than a $5 SMPS? at this price they are probably not and won’t be RFI filtered and most are not even regulated! (Disaster approaching) More expensive Quality audiophile LPS are usually filtered (with the BOBW you can even see the filter box external to the supply) but these are usually in the hundreds of dollars and a big proportion of the cost of the DAC.

Better to have a blanket statement / policy to protect everyone than a list of exceptions and leaving it open to interpretation for people to assume that their $50 EBay wonder would surely be safe.


----------



## DecentLevi (May 9, 2020)

Hey guys, thanks to conversations I've had with the owner of Ciunas Audio I discovered a few things that would hopefully clear a few recent misconceptions on their power filters - copied here with his permission.

Brief Model Overview
Firstly as you can see on this link, they offer 6 models of their ISO-PS filter that vary in both price and size starting at just €150 for their 5v version (that's the one for the Qutest), all the way up to €300 for their 23v version. The size / price increases with each increment of larger voltage version to accommodate the internal voltage regulators, control circuitry & different amount of supercapacitors.

Also they are almost finished developing a variable voltage version that allows you to bypass the internal regulators that charge the supercaps & keep the supercaps charged directly from your own input power supply. This way you can use it for any of your components with DC input, even with an option to power from battery without regulator, and the potentiometer is said to have no impact on fidelity.

Their power filters now all come with 2x (dual) DC outputs of the same voltage, and he also has options for 2x outputs both of different DC voltage outputs for a different price / size.

Clarification on ASR 'teardown report'
"This was a 7 year old DAC which was not designed to be opened (& the user guide mentions this) as the circuitry is tight. The very opening of the products disturbs the 3D stack of boards. As I said that thread on ASR is not how one should go about reviewing a product. He was sent a 7 year old DAC by someone who had bought it on ebay & didn't know how to operate it appropriately - I don't even know what he might have done to it internally? The battery was dead & Amir (the site owner & reviewer) didn't contact me about its operation before posting this review (he has history with me so is not exactly unbiased) which as some posters pointed out is the professional way to go about such reviews. If he had contacted me I would have suggested he test the battery first & discovered immediately that it was depleted - something he didn't test first as you would expect with a battery powered device). *If my products had quality issues you would see it reported in many places other than ASR* (who historically has a gripe with me)."

Customer Reviews - Supercapacitor Power supplies from Ciunas Audio

Jens from Denmark
_The 9v supercapacitor ISO-PS is replacing a 9v ifi audio ipower powering a SOtM tx-USBultra Special Edition and the dc connection is a Ghentaudio Neotech UPOCC 7N Copper 16AWG (JSSG360) cable. SQ improvement is greater than I had expected, is obvious to hear and is also of another nature than my tweaking with lifepo4 batteries and lt3045 regulators normally gives. The ISO-PS has given the sound a clean and pure but most of all an overwhelming presence._

James from Utah - using 5V ISO-PS 
_Wow... less graiin and noise floor than the LPS
1.2.  I can hear that immediately!  A hint more space and detail... immediately apparent.  More relaxed.

Okay this is going to be fun going through my collection
…...
Im smiling ear to ear and every where in between. Thank you so much, James_

Hagen from Germany - using 12V 
_I am very happy with the power supply. Better resolution, the naturalness of the music playback becomes larger; more calm, a blacker background.
The sibilance and perceived distortions are significantly reduced.
In short, I have more fun listening to music !!!!
A clear recommendation from me for your power supply!
I will recommend it to my customers, although I have no financial advantage.
The price of the ISO-PS is very good._

Graham from canada - using 5V supercap ISO-PS into Chord DAC
_Definitely, hearing deeper into the music. Some interesting little ambient sounds coming
I don’t recall hearing before, that must be a result of the lower noise floor. Not noticing any
Negative impact which is equally important._

Clive from UK - using 5V supercap ISO-PS into Chord Qutest
_*SMPS* (Rob Watts stock) was my reference
Detailed, not obviously harsh

*Supercap*
Initially quite similar to SMPS but a bit more listening revealed it as smoother with very solid (tight) bass, made SMPS sound a little harsh. bass light & imprecise.  I tried unplugging the "charger" - I couldn't detect any difference.

*SBooster LPS*
Smooth without the tightness of the Supercap bass, I think this is why when I compared last time I preferred the SMPS to this LPS - Rob Watts says something about interwinding capacitance with LPS providing a route for RF (so some LPS are poor) or did I get two things mixed up?

Supercap wins_

Chris from UK - 5V ISO-PS 
_Compared to iFi iPower (5V) + battery pack) the most noticeable improvement for me was leading edge transients – that alone was worth the purchase. However with further listening, I would suggest that  the soundstage has got wider. Low level details in the far left & right are much more noticeable.  And this effect is totally repeatable when swapping between the ISO-PSU & the iPower/battery combination._

Robin from US
_Hi John! I am using the last PS with the Sonore ultraRendu. I like to use the PS Audio LanRover  in the mix and I power it with the first PS you sent. I still have to connect a module to run a fiber cable but what I have now sounds excellent. I continue to be way impressed with the SILENT, very BLACK background. I will let you know as I play around with everything. I love your products _

Other Comments
I've already ordered my ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio, and not only is it cheaper than the other options out there but the reviews seem solid (it was said that most of their customers do not frequent audio forums which is why there are not many reviews in our circles), and not to mention that the Allo Shanti for one uses thin flimsy non-removable DC output wires. Speaking of Allo Shanti, here were his comments on it:

_"The Shanti is a very good PS, AFAIK. *It does use two small 3.3F* supercapacitors on each channel it's output for 5V which equates to 1.65F capacitance - that's why the power comes up in one or two seconds I suspect these supercaps were an afterthought?). *My PS has 350F supercapacitor banks* (the number per bank is dependent on voltage - 5V I use 3 supercaps, 7V 4 supercxaps & so on - *I always use one more than absolutely required* - gives more energy storage). The Shanti is a conventional PS with transformer rectifier bridge, a large bank of electrolytic capacitors, a capacitance multiplier & some voltage regulators - its main energy storage is in the electrolytic capacitors not those small supercapacitors. My PS takes about 1-2mins to come up to full power because the supercaps are charging up. One other issue you will see reported with the Shanti is that when it's turned off the substantial power left in its bank of capacitors, drains into any devices connected to it which may be a problem with some devices? My SC-PS isolates the outputs from the supercaps when switched off so no drain of power into attached devices."_

RE measurements of power output quality: "_I don't have measurements yet as ripple & noise on power supplies are difficult to make correctly, requiring at least differential scope probes but measurements will not tell you how something sounds - listening is the critical test - if the PS doesn't provide a noticeable improvement then it doesn't matter how good (or how bad) the measurements."_

Also his customer service was excellent and very responsive and he said they have a 30 days home trial to evaluate it against other PSes, + 3 year warranty.
Also I see no use in SMPS rolling with this marvel of a filtered power supply from Ciunas Audio incoming.


----------



## jbarrentine

Paul Bjernklo said:


> I can also hear an improvement of clarity (not brighter but better) compared to really basic optical cables. But then again there are cheap very well made cables like Kabeldirekt optical cables (which I normally recommend) where to be honest I am not so sure I can hear a difference but I still like to experiment 😎




This is my experience. As much as I hate to admit a cable makes a difference.
Cheap glass (something from amazon) *is the same* as Lifatec. The Lifatec is all around prettier tho, and feels better. It just says "premium" in the hand.
Either glass was better than plastic. Although I can see why some people might like the plastic more. It was a slightly warmer? fuzzier? sound. It's an almost imperceptible difference though.

I have yet to hear a difference in an RCA cable of any kind in my own limited testing.
I have yet to hear a difference in power cables of any kind in my own limited testing.
I have yet to test a variety of headphone cables.


----------



## Reactcore

uzi2 said:


> Inspired by @Reactcore posts I had to try my planar headphones direct. HQPlayer has a really smooth digital volume control, so it all works well



Good to hear that👍 next step is adding extra buffer caps inside. Planars need more voltage.. i assume u run qutest on 3v setting? Im on 2v


----------



## uzi2 (May 9, 2020)

Reactcore said:


> Good to hear that👍 next step is adding extra buffer caps inside. Planars need more voltage.. i assume u run qutest on 3v setting? Im on 2v


Thanks, I started at 2v and was able to go up to about -15db before it was getting too loud. I will try 3v...
Yes that's a definite improvement and still not an issue if I had forgotten to change my HQPlayer default setting from -2db. Too loud for listening, but not uncomfortably so for a short while.


----------



## 474194 (May 9, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Hey guys, thanks to conversations I've had with the owner of Ciunas Audio I discovered a few things that would hopefully clear a few recent misconceptions on their power filters - copied here with his permission.



Very nice.  Thanks for sharing.  I think at around the under $250 price point, other options maybe more optimal than an LPS.  Otherwise, you need an LPS around the same price as a Qutest just to filter out all the RFI.  RFI is the #1 enemy for Chord devices, but some prefer the RFI brightness.  I tried to put myself in the shoes of a Qutest owner to see what options are available if the ISO-PS is not suitable.

I did some digging and confirmed with Sir Rob this past week:











Battery Type
Dynamic
ImpedanceCar BatteryX0.02 ohmLiFePo4X<8mohmSupercapacitorX<3.2mohmUSB Battery BankUnknown.  Assuming > [Car Battery, LiFePo4 or Super caps]

Car battery maybe impractical, so I came to the conclusion that LiFePo4 maybe the most optimal after Supercapacitor.  If it wasn't for the 12V down-convert 5V bottleneck, it would be the most optimal.  For HMS, I believe it to be the most optimal since it's straight 12V.  If LiFePo4 can power a Tesla 0-60 in under 3 seconds, it should do fine with the dynamic swings of audio.

So the question you may want to raise with JK is if there is any down conversion to 5V for the ISO-PS or if it's close to native 5V.  Also how it handles RFI.  Super caps seem to filter out the RFI somehow so a confirmation from JK on how this works would be great.  My main concern tho is safety.  Maybe check what safeguards are in place to ensure it doesn't start a fire.  With the teardown, that's what immediately caught my attention.

The ISO-PS should pair well with your Furman.

Thanks for inspiring me to look into this path.  I'm going to eventually get a LiFePo4 for my digital source with the 12V to 5V down for about the same price as a regular USB battery bank with 3A output.



















For the Shanti, the impressions seem good especially at that price.  You can purchase the Shanti at Raspberry Pi online shops if you don't want to buy direct from Allo.  Just worried about the undervoltage.





AA


----------



## DecentLevi

AC-12 said:


> Very nice.  Thanks for sharing.  I think at around the under $250 price point, other options maybe more optimal than an LPS.  Otherwise, you need an LPS around the same price as a Qutest just to filter out all the RFI.  RFI is the #1 enemy for Chord devices, but some prefer the RFI brightness.  I tried to put myself in the shoes of a Qutest owner to see what options are available if the ISO-PS is not suitable.


Granted there may be better LPS for over $1800, but the 5v ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio seems like a pretty low risk at only $165 + shipping though, and it's less than most other options around.


AC-12 said:


> So the question you may want to raise with JK is if there is any down conversion to 5V for the ISO-PS or if it's close to native 5V.  Also how it handles RFI.  Super caps seem to filter out the RFI somehow so a confirmation from JK on how this works would be great.  My main concern tho is safety.  Maybe check what safeguards are in place to ensure it doesn't start a fire.  With the teardown, that's what immediately caught my attention.


I've already ordered their supercapacitor LPS (ISO-PS) for me personally I have no interest in chasing a rabbit hole of myriads of unnecessary technical questions / banter, nor do I have the time - I think I speak for most of us as well. But it may be beneficial to some to know. So maybe @aspro has any words on if his units output native voltage and how they handle RFI. As for safety, as mentioned there does not seem to have ever been an incident with any of his power supplies... and I'd say to don't judge a book by it's cover, or a product by a biased review of a 7 year old broken product by a brand that was not even the item in question.

Please accept my apologies for sounding frank. I don't proclaim to be the biggest proponent of Ciunas Audio nor have I tried them yet, but my strong impression from multiple forums and speaking with the owner is that they make solid products that perform exceptionally and have been a victim of biased reviews, but moreso that I am satisfied with the choice that I made and have no desire to chase after minuscule details on the inner workings of a power supply. If you do, I think you should join another thread and link to it here. You can probably find even better answers that way and post about _experience _rather than derailing things too much about _speculations _on the Qutest DAC thread.

Also if you are interested in the LiFeP04 battery option, perhaps you can just add a few resistors on the DC output or find one that outputs 5v natively.


----------



## HumanMedia (May 9, 2020)

Ironically the Qutest takes 5V power and internally switches it up to 12v.
This was a change from the 2Qute which took 12v. One theory someone put forward is that the change to 5V was to allow people to use the variety of 5V Phone supplies out there, but if those very supplies are often risky and forbidden by Chord Anyway the change makes no sense. Personally I would have preferred it stay at 12v but it is what it is.

To downconvert yourself you would need voltage regulators. Poor voltage regulators may add noise, or if they fail, no more Qutest.
Even manufactured 5V battery supplies would need good regulation to be trusted. Rob has mentioned one he has used for his Mscaler is the a Pilot Pro2 . But apart from that I wouldn’t trust any Cheap power supplies battery or not.

But not being cheap is definitely not a guarantee of them sounding better than the stock power supply. I know 2 well regarded well regulated supplies in the hundreds of dollars, that sound terrible with the Qutest.

Stick with the stock supply. Unless you are getting one of a very short list of quality supplies that sound good with the Qutest, I would stay well away from power supply experiments and tweak elsewhere.


----------



## 474194

DecentLevi said:


> Granted there may be better LPS for over $1800, but the 5v ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio seems like a pretty low risk at only $165 + shipping though, and it's less than most other options around.
> 
> I've already ordered their supercapacitor LPS (ISO-PS) for me personally I have no interest in chasing a rabbit hole of myriads of unnecessary technical questions / banter, nor do I have the time - I think I speak for most of us as well. But it may be beneficial to some to know. So maybe @aspro has any words on if his units output native voltage and how they handle RFI. As for safety, as mentioned there does not seem to have ever been an incident with any of his power supplies... and I'd say to don't judge a book by it's cover, or a product by a biased review of a 7 year old broken product by a brand that was not even the item in question.
> 
> ...



That's a good deal.  Low risk, high reward.  I'm glad the process is over and the ISO-PS is on it's way soon.

No need for further questions to the owner, your previous post was more than enough.  The ISO-PS Supercapacitor is still my primary choice for the Mojo battery replacement after you eased my concerns.  Hope it can be sort of like a Mojo TT w/ the Super Caps.

No worries, it takes years to get acclimated to all the Chord lingo and acronyms.  It can be overwhelming.  I just follow the solid principles and advice from the DAC designer.

LiFePO4 is just another option.  Just like if I had to choose between the ISO-PS SC vs. ISO-PS LiFePO4 solutions:

https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/iso-ps

Just trying to provide a 1B plan if you were on the fence with the 1A plan.  When you mentioned you purchased, it was under "Other Comments"; so I wasn't sure if those were your comments or someone else's comments.


----------



## 474194 (May 9, 2020)

HumanMedia said:


> Ironically the Qutest takes 5V power and internally switches it up to 12v.
> This was a change from the 2Qute which took 12v. One theory someone put forward is that the change to 5V was to allow people to use the variety of 5V Phone supplies out there, but if those very supplies are often risky and forbidden by Chord Anyway the change makes no sense. Personally I would have preferred it stay at 12v but it is what it is.



That's really good to know.  I'll have to re-visit the 2Qute thread.  Has anyone opened the Qutest to see if you can bypass the 5V USB and connect PWR directly?

Also, has this ever been discussed?  The ASR site mentions this could be due to mains-related noise?  I'm wondering if battery will improve things.


----------



## technobear

Strange that everyone is focussed on Lithium batteries of one sort or another event though these must supply some form of electronic regeneration in order to provide 5V.

Good old-fashioned NiMH cells provide 1.2V - 1.3V so 4 of them in series would give 4.8V to 5.2V directly without regeneration.

You can get NiMH 'D' cells in 10,000mAh form which would drive Qutest directly for up to 16 hours.

Simply buy 8 and you can have 4 in the supply and another 4 standing by in the charger.


----------



## 474194 (May 11, 2020)

technobear said:


> Strange that everyone is focussed on Lithium batteries of one sort or another event though these must supply some form of electronic regeneration in order to provide 5V.
> 
> Good old-fashioned NiMH cells provide 1.2V - 1.3V so 4 of them in series would give 4.8V to 5.2V directly without regeneration.
> 
> ...



Lovely.  Thanks for providing another battery option.  I love the 4+4 standby scalability option.  I had a similar 'thought process' with rotating LiFePO4 (~AA sized) batteries.

I think it's more an issue of why the Qutest is not 12V in the first place.  Then you can run 12V natively like the HMS and not have to worry about the 5V down.  I think I'll wait for a Qutest2 w/ 12V.

This is all that's needed if your device is 12V input:









Simple, powerful and clean.  No down-conversion, no 'half-measures' noiseless 12V solution.





I would want the on-demand power of a car battery or LiFePO4 tho and not having to charge everyday.  For e-bikes, e-scooters and Teslas having that on-demand dynamic power of going uphill or immediate acceleration is mandatory.  For audio needs, imo it would be mandatory.  Depending on the size of battery you may only have to charge once or twice a month.

Here's a very demanding veteran Chord poster's comment w/ a regular USB battery bank (3-4 hours max):


----------



## 474194 (May 11, 2020)

Okay.  Good luck everyone.  My arc is finished here.  Too many 12-hour work days this month to think about audio stuff...

Leave you with this:



Mother Of Tone Link



> *Air and Electric Current*
> 
> What do air and the electric current have in common ?
> 
> ...



EDIT:  Almost forgot the AudioBacon comments:









AB


----------



## dac64

technobear said:


> You can get NiMH 'D' cells in 10,000mAh form which would drive Qutest directly for up to 16 hours.



One 'D' can last up to 16 hours?


----------



## dac64

AC-12 said:


>



I've the Pilot Pro2 but I prefer the stock PSU. The instruments were much more distinct, quick and punchy bass, and better layers.

Battery always sounded soft to my liking. I've ordered some rechargeable NiMH to try out. The charger has a 5V USB out.


----------



## technobear

dac64 said:


> One 'D' can last up to 16 hours?


No. Please read the post again. You need 4 of them in series to get the required voltage.


----------



## dac64

technobear said:


> No. Please read the post again. You need 4 of them in series to get the required voltage.



My bad!


----------



## 474194 (May 11, 2020)

dac64 said:


> I've the Pilot Pro2 but I prefer the stock PSU. The instruments were much more distinct, quick and punchy bass, and better layers.
> 
> Battery always sounded soft to my liking. I've ordered some rechargeable NiMH to try out. The charger has a 5V USB out.



Everyone's situation is different + the preferences.  But it's nice to see you keep an open mind and experiment.  This was posted yesterday:





For them, the PP2 worked out on their TT2.  But then lost me when they threw a regulator in the mix.  It's fine, whatever works for each individual.  I just tried to put out there are other options available since battery tech is so robust nowadays.

I know batteries are not labeled "audiophile" so it may not be as appealing:




RW--

Knowing now that I can get a simple LiFePO4 for $50.  I rather go this route than a regular USB battery bank.  They last 5-10 years and less freq charging.

https://www.bioennopower.com/collections/12v-series-lifepo4-batteries





You have the power of a car battery in a small safe form factor.  That's what I would want going forward to power audio equipment.  Only a few alternatives listed below offer dynamic power with low impedance.  Regular USB battery banks don't offer this performance so I'm moving on from USB battery banks.  I want the fast twitch dynamic power that only LiFePO4 and car battery offer.  It's close to the same price here as a USB battery bank in California so might as well evolve to LiFePO4.  No risk, high reward situation.  Another option is the PP2 powering the ISO-PS SC to give you dynamic power and low impedance, but dependent on situation.  I don't consider PP2 or regular USB battery banks high performers, but do provide clean power.



Battery Type
Dynamic
ImpedanceCar BatteryX0.02 ohmLiFePo4X<8mohmSupercapacitorX<3.2mohmUSB Battery BankUnknown.  Assuming > [Car Battery, LiFePo4 or Super caps]

Edit:  It kinda threw me off you were using PP2 for USB PWR since most are using it for the DC (4.5A).  Are you plugging into USB1 (2A)?  Sometimes USB ports share the same bus so best to only use one port at a time to ensure one port is not taking away power from another port.


----------



## dac64

AC-12 said:


> Edit:  It kinda threw me off you were using PP2 for USB PWR since most are using it for the DC (4.5A).  Are you plugging into USB1 (2A)?  Sometimes USB ports share the same bus so best to only use one port at a time to ensure one port is not taking away power from another port.



You have brought up a good point! I couldn't remember which USB port I used for testing. Just plug and play, 

Thought Rob said 1A is sufficient to power the Qutest.


----------



## 474194 (May 12, 2020)

dac64 said:


> You have brought up a good point! I couldn't remember which USB port I used for testing. Just plug and play,
> 
> Thought Rob said 1A is sufficient to power the Qutest.



Thanks for your refreshing honesty.  In my experience, the Hugo2 will auto-shutoff if your listening and charging at the same time with 1A.  It's not enough for that purpose.  Supplying 2A+ should give you a better impression by giving it proper power.  I'm only looking for 3A solutions going forward.  That's why I was so overjoyed when the USBbuddy specs revealed a HQ 3A output:





A random USB micro cable may not be enough.  I recommend at least a Anker microUSB cable:

https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Powerline-Premium-Motorola-Smartphones/dp/B019Q6Y2MK?ref_=ast_sto_dp

I had a cable that works fine for all devices I have tried except for Hugo2.  It would stop charging after 10 minutes.  Once I insert the Anker, everything works normally.

On the extreme end, I use a Ghentaudio Gotham with 5 layers of shielding.  This gives it proper bandwidth and since I work so hard to keep RFI out of the system I don't want it sneaking in via the cable.




RW--









WARNING:  The Gotham cable will likely NOT work with the Qutest.  It's a PWR only cable, no DATA.  From my understanding the Qutest needs a 5V handshake to turn on.  I don't see a physical ON/OFF button.  For example, the gold thin 5V cable on the photo below conducts the handshake.  The Gotham cable does not have this soldered in...  I have no idea how the Qutest turns off and on so could be completely in the wrong.





I noticed audio equipment and sound systems listed in the description:





The battery targeting avionics looking inviting:





Another option are Tesla replacement batteries:





GL GG


----------



## HumanMedia (May 12, 2020)

My findings.
Batteries.
Went down the battery route with my 2Qute. In some respects better than stock supply, smoother. But in some respects worse, too soft, poor dynamicS. Uptone JS-2 Linear supply and the Farad3 supercapacitor supplies clearly better. The Farad measures better than battery as well. Batteries now in storage unused.

USB cables.
Tried the Curious USB amongst many others. It changes the sound definitely, but IMO makes it sound worse. The cheaper Supra cable was generally better and the Oyaide USB in my signature was the best I tried and the cheapest ‘audio’ USB you can buy. Expansive soundstage, clean, great bass and has less of its own sound.

Gotham DC cable.
On first listen is has a Wonderful liquid midrange but over time its crunchy highs become apparent. It took me months to figure out it was the Gotham, but once removed the Smoother highs returned, It’s better replacements are the Ghent Canare 4S6G (OFC version) with JSSG shielding added By Ghent (so it is effectively the same shielding as the Gotham) and even better was the higher gauge Canare 4S8 with JSSG shielding. The last is my favourite DC cable, but is too thick to be terminated into a micro USB for the Qutest. The 4S8 is also a special order from Ghent. IMO the two sound better than the Gotham and the a Neotech and ironically are a little cheaper. My two Gotham cables are unused and in storage.

Just thought I would mention this as someone who has gone down the paths suggested In posts above and found it wasnt the ideal outcome, and my eventual better result.


----------



## 474194

I already presented alternative options and all the information is already publicly posted.  I hardly put in anything subjective and just posting what's already available if you research.  I just try to follow the DAC designer's philosophy and advice.  People are welcome to do what they want.  I don't care.  If it's a perfect split of 50/50 battery LPS, to me it's like flipping a coin.  If it lands on heads or tails, I don't care.  I'm not going to get emotional if it lands on tails five times in a row.  If the LPS crowd wants to justify their purchases by encouraging others to follow in their footsteps, I don't care.  I'm just trying to present an alternative viewpoint and post the DAC designer's suggestions.  

Your free to encourage others on your "Piazzo Nuclear Power Plant I don't hear RFI Audiophile LPS" all you want as I already have one foot out the door on this thread.  Your argument is with the DAC designer, I don't have a dog in the race.

After you message RW, his first two words from his reply will probably be "Oh, dear..."






Take care and good luck.  I just want to present an alternative in peace.  Take it up with RW.  Don't listen with your wallets (RW--)...

Arc complete.  Adios.


----------



## DecentLevi

Hey Colin @hypnos1 I thought you may benefit from scrolling thru the last few pages on this thread - your having the Hugo TT2 there's been mention also of how some of the power conditioning options may be helpful. Granted you already have mains power conditioning but this is only useful for components that use direct AC. You may like some of the small car battery options or the ISO-PS which is a Linear Power Supply option by Ciunas Audio from this link (select 15v from the dropdown menu). I'll be receiving mine in a week or two for the Qutest.


----------



## Triode User

Well, it’s time to alter my signature and add the Qutest because the one I have bought arrived yesterday to go in the system in the family room/kitchen. It came with a MCRU power supply which is a bonus. I just love the smallness of the Qutest. The finish on it is superb and the fit between the two halves is spot on.

Friends have loaned me an RME dac and a Denafrips Ares 2 so I will probably do a little comparison listening with those just for fun and will also try a range of power supplies but so far the Qutest does exactly what I wanted.


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Well, it’s time to alter my signature and add the Qutest because the one I have bought arrived yesterday to go in the system in the family room/kitchen. It came with a MCRU power supply which is a bonus. I just love the smallness of the Qutest. The finish on it is superb and the fit between the two halves is spot on.
> 
> Friends have loaned me an RME dac and a Denafrips Ares 2 so I will probably do a little comparison listening with those just for fun and will also try a range of power supplies but so far the Qutest does exactly what I wanted.


Hello Nick ,did your Qutest also come with the orginal psu?
If so, I'd be interested to hear how those two power supply units compare with the Qutest connected to your M scaler and your Wave BNC cables of course.
I haven't used my Qutest on its own since getting my Mscaler.
The difference the Mscaler makes in my systems both via headphones and speakers is something I  absolutely don't want to live without after my initial close comparisons between Q on its own and with the Mscaler.

But I am getting a bit tired of having to remember to re-charge my battery powered psu sometimes twice daily to allow  my Q/HMS combo to  perform optimally. 
Cheers CC


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> Hello Nick ,did your Qutest also come with the orginal psu?
> If so, I'd be interested to hear how those two power supply units compare with the Qutest connected to your M scaler and your Wave BNC cables of course.
> I haven't used my Qutest on its own since getting my Mscaler.
> The difference the Mscaler makes in my systems both via headphones and speakers is something I  absolutely don't want to live without after my initial close comparisons between Q on its own and with the Mscaler.
> ...



Hi Christer, Good to hear from you. Yes the recently acquired Qutest also came with its factory supply. I have in mind to try a few different power supplies that I have to hand including a 5v Sean Jacobs DC4 supply which is completely over the top for the Qutest and the factory supply. I will also try a battery but only for interest because no matter how good it might sound I am NOT having the faff of charging batteries for a home system that is normally left on 24/7 365 days a year (This one is in the kitchen where we normally have the UK Radio 3 on all day). As I mentioned, it came with a LPS so that will be in the shoot out!

I will also try the Qutest with an Mscaler but again this will only be for fun because Mscaler lives in the Dave system.


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Hi Christer, Good to hear from you. Yes the recently acquired Qutest also came with its factory supply. I have in mind to try a few different power supplies that I have to hand including a 5v Sean Jacobs DC4 supply which is completely over the top for the Qutest and the factory supply. I will also try a battery but only for interest because no matter how good it might sound I am NOT having the faff of charging batteries for a home system that is normally left on 24/7 365 days a year (This one is in the kitchen where we normally have the UK Radio 3 on all day). As I mentioned, it came with a LPS so that will be in the shoot out!
> 
> I will also try the Qutest with an Mscaler but again this will only be for fun because Mscaler lives in the Dave system.


 Just wait until you hear it with an Mscaler!
Do those words ring a bell?
They also come "straight from the horse's mouth".
And all I can add to them is,spot on!
He was talking about Hugo 2 orginally, but it applies equally well to Qutest imho.

Once heard that way you may have to get a second Mscaler?
Or move your Mscaler from your DAVE to your Qutest?
Dave is the only Chord dac I could possibly, but only possibly, live with without an Mscaler. 
But even Dave very clearly benefits from an Mscaler.

For me the Mscaler is what REALLY brings Qutest to life.
Without it I suspect it may have to face some  competition from other contenders, possibly even from one or the other or even  both  of the two you mentioned you'd get on loan from friends.
Cheers and keep us posted on your findings CC.


----------



## GreenBow

AC-12 said:


> I already presented alternative options and all the information is already publicly posted.  I hardly put in anything subjective and just posting what's already available if you research.  I just try to follow the DAC designer's philosophy and advice.  People are welcome to do what they want.  I don't care.  If it's a perfect split of 50/50 battery LPS, to me it's like flipping a coin.  If it lands on heads or tails, I don't care.  I'm not going to get emotional if it lands on tails five times in a row.  If the LPS crowd wants to justify their purchases by encouraging others to follow in their footsteps, I don't care.  I'm just trying to present an alternative viewpoint and post the DAC designer's suggestions.
> 
> Your free to encourage others on your "Piazzo Nuclear Power Plant I don't hear RFI Audiophile LPS" all you want as I already have one foot out the door on this thread.  Your argument is with the DAC designer, I don't have a dog in the race.
> 
> ...



I never understood this perspective from Rob Watts. 

I am not arguing, but I thought the point of linear PSUs was point blank about clean power supply. Filtering out mains noise and sending only clean power to the DAC. The linear PSU concept would be pointless if it filtered out mains noise, then introduced RFI noise. 

Have I missed something completely?


----------



## HumanMedia (May 14, 2020)

GreenBow said:


> I never understood this perspective from Rob Watts.
> 
> I am not arguing, but I thought the point of linear PSUs was point blank about clean power supply. Filtering out mains noise and sending only clean power to the DAC. The linear PSU concept would be pointless if it filtered out mains noise, then introduced RFI noise.
> 
> Have I missed something completely?



I had a quick look for the link from which AC12 quoted, but couldn’t find it, I was sure it was just a few pages back? Maybe a different thread? AC12 can you provide the link?

I will give you my obtuse dumbass interpretation of how I remember it.
Most linear supplies do filter out noise but only in the kilohertz-megahertz range (common ferrites will do this also).
The frequency range of noise that affect the DAC the most and which most linear supplies and the DAC itself doesn’t screen out is the gigahertz range, particularly the 1 to 2.5 ghz band. The higher the frequency the less this noise behaves in traditional 'electrical' ways, and while low frequency noise does not travel across power transformers, high frequency noise does via capacitive coupling across the primary and secondary windings. If the supply is grounded, high frequency noise that is present on the ground plane can create loops through your entire system (and the effect is probably amplified.)

Add to that the fact that many cheap linear power supplies (like almost everything less than than a hundred dollars off EBay or alibaba) are not regulated they can easily blow the protection diode in your DAC.

So as I mentioned in my post a couple of pages back, for the vast majority of people, and the vast majority of power supplies and situations, Rob is correct and it’s probably a waste of your time experimenting with cheap linear supplies and even many expensive ones.

Battery power does address this, but as a few of us have found it doesn’t mean they will always sound better, maybe even worse than the stock supply.

Again Robs suggestions will be true for the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time and will also protect their DAC.

However for the fringe of the fringe who want that last measure of performance and are willing to spend disproportionately high amounts of money (relative to the cost of the DAC) there are a small number of power supplies that empirically do offer audible improvements. And there could be sound reasons why they do - they are floated from ground, have high frequency filters (eg MCRU has one externally) and don't use toroidal transformers (the JS-2 uses an RCore transformer) etc etc...


----------



## HumanMedia (May 13, 2020)

Ya know every time I see reference to 2.5ghz noise being impactful to ones DAC, I immediately think of 2.5ghz wifi which operates at that frequency. Could the rising awareness of RFI issues be directly proportional to the skyrocketing prevalence and strength of home wifi?

Are we unwittingly creating a major audio problem for ourselves with 2.5ghz noise, which Rob says is pernicious and hard to eradicate, by using more and more wifi and bigger and more powerful wifi routers? Im starting to think YES absolutely. And if anything in or near your audio system uses wifi then the strength of the RFI it creates will be exponentially higher the closer it is to the receiving component or the router itself....

And cable shielding which is connected at each end, to provide a 0v reference (ie  signal ground), will not help at, in fact quite the opposite as it will act as an antenna to bring in that 2.5ghz noise right were it is very damaging - signal ground.

Maybe that's why the JSSG shielding technique is so effective and audible, as it uses multiple shields the outer two of which are not tied to ground but tied together to create a faraday cage effectively screening from 2.5ghz wifi?

Food for thought.


----------



## DecentLevi (May 13, 2020)

I for one am actually an opponent of wireless to some extent. Wi-fi & cell phone towers causing radiation & EMI / RFI interference galore, along with potentially degrading effects for the audio purist. Wi-fi is certainly convenient just like bluetooth airpods, but there are trade offs relating to speed / stability / fidelity and even tumors in some cases. Unfortunately everything today is built around Generation Z teens who couldn't give two #%**'s about things such as sound quality and health, favoring appearance and popularity. Not only does one's source components act as antennas but also all cables as well. And almost anywhere you go even at home in urban areas you are saturated with around  *ten *simultaneous Wi-Fi signals coming from all directions.


----------



## GreenBow

HumanMedia said:


> I had a quick look for the link from which AC12 quoted, but couldn’t find it, I was sure it was just a few pages back? Maybe a different thread? AC12 can you provide the link?
> 
> I will give you my obtuse dumbass interpretation of how I remember it.
> Most linear supplies do filter out noise but only in the kilohertz-megahertz range (common ferrites will do this also).
> ...



Thank you. Great full explanation.

It also maybe explains what Rob Watts was saying about the 2GHz noise problem with the MScaler PSU. Or to be correct he and someone recently quoted it. He said that using battery power for the MScaler sorts 2GHz noise. It removes the need for something about BNC cabling. I think he meant you don't need to use ferrite BNC cables from M-Scaler to DAC, to remove the noise.

However if Rob is saying the PSU for the Qutest can reduce 2GHz noise. Then it should be possible for the same with the M-Scaler PSU. I don't know.

However I do feel more up to speed, so thank you very much.


----------



## dac64 (May 14, 2020)

Improvements over the sound.

My friend lent me a Line EMI Meter:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/10KHz-10MH...QnPYprV0TriLmYRc87hswOKGGfesaAjbWEALw_wcB:G:s

The measurements (noise level):

Dedicated lines:  ~250mV
Dedicated line step-down to 120V : ~70mV, for pre-amp (Transformer helps to reduce the noise level???)
Household lines: ~385mV
China-made lithium battery sine wave generator inverter: ~1800mV. What a surprise!
Lithium battery sine wave generator inverter after step-up and step-down to 100V : ~190mV. (Transformers help to reduce the noise level???)

For the above:
1. Dedicated lines were just slightly better than the household lines.
2. Poor quality products will make the sound worst (e.g. the inverter). Anyway, my Dac is at the clean-end therefore RFI isn't really an issue.

But, after I plugged-in all my clean-end digital gears onto a more than two decades old Audio power wedge.

https://www.ukaudiomart.com/details...ies-power-wedge-1-conditioner/images/1520216/

The music become more lively, more relax, better depth and separations because background is quieter, better details across the whole spectrum.

This is because the measurements from the outlets were ~14mV.

I always use the below for the listening test. If the piano sounds lively and coherence, probably you were there!

https://www.amazon.com/Glenn-Gould-Complete-Goldberg-Variations/dp/B00006FI7C


----------



## jwbrent

I bought my Qutest nearly two years ago and I’m quite happy with it. I’d love to buy a TT2 and M Scaler, but I live in an apartment these days and I have to be considerate to my neighbors, so I’m not expecting to make a change until my living situation changes. Since my Raidhos use a ribbon tweeter and have a slightly soft treble presentation, the Qutest works very well with them tonally.


----------



## 474194 (May 14, 2020)

Apologies if my last post seemed like a rant.  It was just a drive-by post after long working hours this month.  I barely have five minutes to read some post a day much less take a deep breath and write a post.  I don't even recall what I wrote down.  It's end of the week now, so much calmer.  Thanks for not flaming.

People spend good coin on their LPS so I don't want to comment directly, just general.  I'm not a desktop / speaker listener, but I try to follow the sound principles of the Chord DAC designer.

To me it just doesn't compute why you would go the LPS route.  If I run my Hugo2 battery-less one day, I want a strong powerful low impedance battery to replace the Enix batteries.  I would never consider an LPS to run my Hugo2.  Don't you want your Chord SQ to be on par with a Hugo2?  Adding a LPS just seems like your turning it into a Schitt product, not maintaining a Chord sound signature and quality.  A Qutest with a LiFePO4 will be like a Hugo2 on steroids.  A basic regular USB battery may not meet your standards, but a powerful LiFePO4 should.  I understand it's like electric car vs gasoline / petro vehicles.  It takes time to adjust from traditional thinking.  Teslas now outperform the noisy super cars.

Don't you want something like this?





I know "try hard" solutions are the fad, but don't you just want neutral and natural the way Chord SQ was intended.  I'm not into "WOW" exaggerations.  I want neutral, natural flat accurate the way Chord intended.  A battery provides that, that's what is so special about the Hugo2.  It's a pure black background with no noise.

I'm sorry for stepping on toes on this thread.  It just everybody is recommending LPS to newcomers and I just don't understand why when it's strongly suggested not to go this route.  IMO, RW is pretty neutral in his post.  When he adds his own strong subjectivity, I take it seriously.

Your allowing potential RFI to enter your corrupted system from the source.  It won't matter what USB, optical, DC cable, filters you use, the RFI is in your system.  It's like a super spreader of RFI.  With batteries, your on lockdown quarantine.

Any impressions will not be valid because so many things can be corrupted.  It's not factory neutral Chord sig anymore.  It's your own subjective 'WOW, it sounds good' interpretation.  Your conning yourself.  It's SQ with RF noise characteristics.  It filters down to your impressions of your other products and cables since it's RFI Ground Zero from the power source.  But it's your systems, everyone can do what they like.  I use to think Summit-Fi posters are open-minded, rational and logical.  But most are just set in their ways boomers whom don't allow for alternative solutions, but their own.

I like taking subjectivity out of Chord products and just let them shine the way the designer intended.


----------



## uzi2

Wow... your speaker cables look capable of charging my car


----------



## 474194

Here's a thinner one . Maybe one day we can car battery cable roll.






Actually, I read somewhere four of these "AA"-size powerful LiFePO4 can jumpstart a car:


----------



## Triode User

AC-12 said:


> Apologies if my last post seemed like a rant.  It was just a drive-by post after long working hours this month.  I barely have five minutes to read some post a day much less take a deep breath and write a post.  I don't even recall what I wrote down.  It's end of the week now, so much calmer.  Thanks for not flaming.
> 
> People spend good coin on their LPS so I don't want to comment directly, just general.  I'm not a desktop / speaker listener, but I try to follow the sound principles of the Chord DAC designer.
> 
> ...



You have quoted a post of mine but even having read your post several times I’m struggling to understand whether you are agreeing with me or disagreeing.


----------



## DecentLevi

jwbrent said:


> I bought my Qutest nearly two years ago and I’m quite happy with it. I’d love to buy a TT2 and M Scaler, but I live in an apartment these days and I have to be considerate to my neighbors, so I’m not expecting to make a change until my living situation changes. Since my Raidhos use a ribbon tweeter and have a slightly soft treble presentation, the Qutest works very well with them tonally.


Not sure if I misread this, but to me adding extra source components won't affect the neighbors any differently.

Which speakers and amp are those?


----------



## jwbrent

DecentLevi said:


> Not sure if I misread this, but to me adding extra source components won't affect the neighbors any differently.
> 
> Which speakers and amp are those?



With better gear, there’s more of a desire to listen more loudly, at least for me. Raidho XT-1s and a Sugden A21SE Signature. The Sugden is the most recent change since it sounds fantastic at low volume levels. It’s pure Class A design makes for a great room heater as well.


----------



## dac64

jwbrent said:


> ...but I live in an apartment these days and I have to be considerate to my neighbors, so I’m not expecting to make a change until my living situation changes. Since my Raidhos use a ribbon tweeter and have a slightly soft treble presentation, the Qutest works very well with them tonally.



If you're considerate, get the HMS to pair up with the Qutest, your neighbours will feel less disturbances because HMS have refined the sounds!


----------



## Triode User

DecentLevi said:


> Not sure if I misread this, but to me adding extra source components won't affect the neighbors any differently.
> 
> Which speakers and amp are those?



Sure, but as sound quality issues are addressed the music can sound not as loud and one can be tempted  to turn up the volume because it just sounds sweeter.


----------



## dac64 (May 15, 2020)

dac64 said:


> The measurements (noise level):
> 
> Dedicated lines:  ~250mV
> Household lines: ~385mV



OK!

The noise levels fluctuate between ~100mV to ~1300mV between the day. the EMI meter tells me when is the good time listen to music. 

Thinking of getting some of these:

https://www.kempelektroniksshop.nl/brands/www-kempelektroniks-nl/sns-plug.html


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> OK!
> 
> The noise levels fluctuate between ~100mV to ~1300mV between the day. the EMI meter tells me when is the good time listen to music.
> 
> ...


At least you can measure the difference,although many of the claims of this product sound nonsense...


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> At least you can measure the difference,although many of the claims of this product sound nonsense...



I don't have electronic background, which claims were nonsense, the emi meter or shunt noise suppressor, good to enlighten us.


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> I don't have electronic background, which claims were nonsense, the emi meter or shunt noise suppressor, good to enlighten us.


I am sorry but I didn't mean that most of the claims are nonsense and I am not able to edit the message.

But I can't understand how this device lowers the line impedance,I find it very expensive and the claim that more devices will make the outcome even better makes me think that either this device alone is not good enough in the end or it tries to sell us more than one without reason...


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> I am sorry but I didn't mean that most of the claims are nonsense and I am not able to edit the message.
> 
> But I can't understand how this device lowers the line impedance,I find it very expensive and the claim that more devices will make the outcome even better makes me think that either this device alone is not good enough in the end or it tries to sell us more than one without reason...



Yes, it's expensive. I guess someone with electrical background can build one!

I was attracted by the image.


----------



## 474194

Triode User said:


> You have quoted a post of mine but even having read your post several times I’m struggling to understand whether you are agreeing with me or disagreeing.



It doesn't matter if I agree or disagree on anything.  That's just human subjectivity.  That's what I try to take out of the equation when I take a step back and consider the optimal audio chain route.

What I enjoyed about the quote is your progression arc in this hobby.  Not everybody has the luxury to LPS-roll, so your keeping an open mind about the 'RF Noise' variable in the system.  Most want that 'WOW' factor in their system and then label it 'soft' when there's no aggressiveness.  Flat, boring, soft it doesn't matter as long it's Chord ruler flat with no exaggerations is what should be the goal.  The quote has nothing to do with power supplies, but more what one should strive for in their systems.  To not be fooled / conned by the 'WOW'.


----------



## 474194 (May 16, 2020)

Thanks for letting me make my 'battery' case here.  I found a pair of speakers to drive direct with a TT2 and not have to add a amp in the mix with a Qutest so going to turn my attention to the TT2.  Unsubbing here.

It's fine if you get an LPS for yourself, but to recommend to newcomers is a stretch.  At least let newcomers know the pros and cons of different options.

Looking back at 'Battery Benefits' in the below photo, I can't help thinking "So, a Hugo2...".  If a Hugo2 can perform so well on 2 "AA"-size batteries, imagine what a "C4"-size LiFePO4 battery with the power and low impendance of a car battery can do for your Qutest.  Hugo2 should be the optimal reference standard for Qutest users.  If it has the exact same sound characteristics as a Hugo2, goal should be achieved.  Only way it seems is with a battery.  Otherwise, you are trying too hard to make the Qutest into a TT2/DAVE when it's not. It's the opposite effect and you turn it into a Schitt (brand, not pun).


----------



## 474194 (May 16, 2020)

Last post on this thread.  Promise.  Researching TT2 thread for speakers and stumbled upon...  Thought it maybe of interests.  Provides a little more insight for newcomers.  Your applying a traditional audio solution to a modern DAC.  Modern DACs need modern solutions.  Chord DACs don't need to compensate.  Your dealing with FPGA, not off-the-shelf inferior DAC products that need to compensate.  LPS + FPGA seems like a reciple for disaster.


----------



## Reactcore

My head is dazzling of so my psu posts.. im just enjoying my stock psu powered Qutest keepin my wallet filled.


----------



## dac64

Reactcore said:


> My head is dazzling of so my psu posts.. im just enjoying my stock psu powered Qutest keepin my wallet filled.



I've not start my EMI findings!


----------



## Zzt231gr

To fire things up again and keep the thread goin;my MCRU psu didn't arrive yet...


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> To fire things up again and keep the thread goin;my MCRU psu didn't arrive yet...



hifi rule no. 1 - rack must be able to support the equipment without any deforms!


----------



## Zzt231gr

dac64 said:


> hifi rule no. 1 - rack must be able to support the equipment without any deforms!


You are absolutely correct!It is in my plans to upgrade for so long time,but other things had more significance until now...


----------



## GreenBow (May 21, 2020)

Talking about PSUs. The SBooster is reviewed in the current issue 463 June 2020 of HiFi Choice. (Page 108.)

There is even a Qutest specified one on the SBooster website. https://www.sbooster.com/botw-pp-eco-5v-6v/chord-qutest


----------



## Zzt231gr

GreenBow said:


> Talking about PSUs. The SBooster is reviewed in the current issue 463 June 2020 of HiFi Choice. (Page 108.)
> 
> There is even a Qutest specified one on the SBooster website. https://www.sbooster.com/botw-pp-eco-5v-6v/chord-qutest


Great!

What is the review outcome?It is a little hard for me to buy the magazine here in Greece...


----------



## Triode User

GreenBow said:


> Talking about PSUs. The SBooster is reviewed in the current issue 463 June 2020 of HiFi Choice. (Page 108.)
> 
> There is even a Qutest specified one on the SBooster website. https://www.sbooster.com/botw-pp-eco-5v-6v/chord-qutest



Thanks for that. As it happens I have an SBooster coming today for my Qutest to see if it displaces the MCRU power supply I currently use . . . . .


----------



## Zzt231gr

Triode User said:


> Thanks for that. As it happens I have an SBooster coming today for my Qutest to see if it displaces the MCRU power supply I currently use . . . . .


Isn't MCRU supposed to be of higher quality and better circuit design than the Sbooster?


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Thanks for that. As it happens I have an SBooster coming today for my Qutest to see if it displaces the MCRU power supply I currently use . . . . .


Hello Nick I am still waiting for your full psu report. But I take the above as an indication that you do  prefer the MCRU over the stock supply.
What differences do you hear between the stock supply and the MCRU?
And once tested, which of the two MCRU/SBooster supplies is the better one in your system?
I am really getting tired of having to re-charge my battery supply with Qutest but would like a power supply that sounds, or maybe better  explained cleans up the signal better than the stock supply does  my Qutest /HMS.
My Qutest battery solution delivers clearly audible  cleaner, calmer, fuller, more effortless and more realistic SQ with acoustic music of all formats and sample rates.
Would either of these two supplies also bring any benefits when used with an Mscaler?
And can they also be used with the Mscaler?
I am currently only using a better than stock psu  solution with my Qutest.
I see you are using Sean Jacobs power supplies with both your DAVE and HMS.
But would cheaper psu's like the MCRU or SBooster also bring audible improvements over the stock supply also with HMS in your opinion?
And if so, what improvements do you hear?
Cheers CC


----------



## vo_obgyn

I have an SBooster PS for my Chord Huei Phono Stage. Sounds good with my Linn Sondek LP12.


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> Hello Nick I am still waiting for your full psu report. But I take the above as an indication that you do  prefer the MCRU over the stock supply.
> What differences do you hear between the stock supply and the MCRU?
> And once tested, which of the two MCRU/SBooster supplies is the better one in your system?
> I am really getting tired of having to re-charge my battery supply with Qutest but would like a power supply that sounds, or maybe better  explained cleans up the signal better than the stock supply does  my Qutest /HMS.
> ...



Hi Christer, Just to explain. I bought a second hand Qutest which just happened to come with an MCRU power supply. So far I have only listened with the MCRU supply however separately I have got involved in trying a third party interface board to put in the Bluesound Node 2i to enable it to run off outboard power supplies. As the Node 2i also requires 5v I have had a vague plan to accumulate a number of 5v power supplies and to try them at different times with the Qutest and Node 2i.

In all of this I will do my best to answer your questions. Just one answer ahead of that, companies such as SBooster and MCRU do indeed make the same power supply but with output voltage (15v) to suit the Mscaler. As an aside, I use a Sean Jacobs LPS with my Mscaler and to my ears it sounds at least as good as battery (good for me being defined as softer top end, mid range less 'in your face' with more real detail therefore revealed and bass which is deeper and tighter). I know this flies in the face of RW comments regarding LPS but on the other hand Innuos use Sean's LPS extensively in their digital equipment including the Statement which has a separate LPS for each process.

So separate to my 5v testing I am working my way through 15v supplies with the Mscaler including others such as the Farad3.


----------



## GreenBow (May 21, 2020)

Triode User said:


> Thanks for that. As it happens I have an SBooster coming today for my Qutest to see if it displaces the MCRU power supply I currently use . . . . .



I have an IFi iUSB 3.0 which I tried on my Qutest for an A-B testing against stock Qutest PSU. In a quick test I noticed no difference. Although a much longer testing would really be needed. I like the iFi because it gives me a desktop one/off switch form Qutest.

This iFi one has a whole raft of sceientific claims on the iFi website, about military grade RFI reduction etc. However I am sceptical about it. The PSU part of it might be fine, and I heard no brightness with using it as PSU with Qutest.

When I used it with Mojo though, and ran the reclocking line on it too to the Mojo for data. Total disaster.
It has two lines:
1. Clean power at 5V.
2. USB line from file source like PC, which goes through the Ifi. It cleans the USB lines from the PC too, that the data runs on.

Someone said they heard a report that it introduces brightness on the UBS line. This was after I bought mine. I tried this ifI with Mojo, and the brightness made me unplug it within seconds. Meaning no, it does not clean the USB data lines. It either does add brightness, or it was because I removed my Jitterbug to use the iFi. However I never remember my Mojo being that bright before I bought the Jitterbug.


It means I have slowly been developing an interest in SBooster. Strange thing is that I find Chord DACs nicely balanced anyway. In other words, other PSUs are about curiosity rather than a feeling of need. Will be fun to hear your impressions.


----------



## dac64

GreenBow said:


> Someone said they heard a report that it introduces brightness on the UBS line. This was after I bought mine. I tried this ifI with Mojo, and the brightness made me unplug it within seconds. Meaning no, it does not clean the USB data lines. It either does add brightness, or it was because I removed my Jitterbug to use the iFi. However I never remember my Mojo being that bright before I bought the Jitterbug.



Probably, it injects more noises than the stock psu (40mV) into the line.


----------



## uzi2

The only essential power mod for the Qutest


----------



## Richardhoos

Question for those of you using a Chord Qutest with the GSX-Mini — do you use the Qutest on 2 or 3 volts?


----------



## Pier Paolo

I have some BNC to RCA adapter (both 50 and 75 ohm, gold plated and plain) and they are very difficult to insert and to remove: the center hole of the qutest female connector is too tight, i risk to damage the connectors on the qutest. is it only my specimen?


----------



## dac64

Pier Paolo said:


> I have some BNC to RCA adapter (both 50 and 75 ohm, gold plated and plain) and they are very difficult to insert and to remove: the center hole of the qutest female connector is too tight, i risk to damage the connectors on the qutest. is it only my specimen?



Maybe. Use toslink. Best for chord new dac.


----------



## Pier Paolo

Toslink is only one and I want to use ALL inputs, not only one


----------



## dac64

Pier Paolo said:


> Toslink is only one and I want to use ALL inputs, not only one



Some said blue Jean cable is good, and inexpensive.

Should be able to customise RCA to BNC.

If the adaptor might demage the female BNC, don't try your luck.


----------



## Pier Paolo

dac64 said:


> Some said blue Jean cable is good, and inexpensive.
> 
> Should be able to customise RCA to BNC.
> 
> If the adaptor might demage the female BNC, don't try your luck.


Thanks. I hava also a rca to bnc cable but it present the same problem. The center hole for the male pin is too tight


----------



## greenblured

Pier Paolo said:


> Thanks. I hava also a rca to bnc cable but it present the same problem. The center hole for the male pin is too tight


I am using Benchmark(Canare) rca>bnc 1 meter. No problem with fit.


----------



## dac64

greenblured said:


> I am using Benchmark(Canare) rca>bnc 1 meter. No problem with fit.



My BNC also canared, standard across the industries


----------



## HumanMedia

DecentLevi said:


> You may like some of the small car battery options or the ISO-PS which is a Linear Power Supply option by Ciunas Audio from this link (select 15v from the dropdown menu). I'll be receiving mine in a week or two for the Qutest.



Have you received and tried the supply yet? Please post your results when you do, I’m sure I’m not the only one interested in your findings.


----------



## RobertSM (May 29, 2020)

The unboxing of my qutest that happened just a few hours ago.

All set-up and connected now. Just doing some causal playlist listening. Initial impressions are very good though.


----------



## kkrazik2008

RobertSM said:


> The unboxing of my qutest that happened just a few hours ago.
> 
> All set-up and connected now. Just doing some causal playlist listening. Initial impressions are very good though.


What DAC are you coming from? How did you select this, what other DAC’s were you considering?


----------



## RobertSM (May 29, 2020)

I'm coming from the Violectric V850 DAC. A delta sigma DAC that's been around for awhile. At least 5 years that I know of.

I had the Chord Hugo TT2 at my home for a weeks time during a loaner tour program last year. I liked it a great deal but I didn't think it was worth the price. It offered pre-amp features that I didnt need and I honestly felt like it didn't work for me.

The qutest on the other hand, I'm learning works very well. I have a very good headphone amp/pre-amp, the SPL Phonitor X w/DAC which I love. I've been using it for awhile now and really love it. The DAC module is okay. Good to have but nothing to write home about. I was seeking an upgrade to my sound and had really decided on the RME ADI DAC or the Qutest. Again, I think the RME is a great product but it had way more features than I needed. I spent ALOT of time reading this Chord Qutest thread and the Rob Watts thread on here. I decided that what Watts was doing with his algorithms and just his general views on sound was in my opinion very important. So, that's basically how I arrived to the qutest. And I have to say, so far so good. It doesn't sound exactly like the Hugo TT2 but it absolutely sounds like a sibling. I really feel like you get a great DAC for the money. And you get Watts and his special coding and ideas on sound. It's also what I needed...a pure DAC. So far so good, really very happy with it.


----------



## DecentLevi

HumanMedia said:


> Have you received and tried the supply yet? Please post your results when you do, I’m sure I’m not the only one interested in your findings.


Good question. I ordered the ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio a few weeks ago but it has been delayed in shipping due to the unprecented global situation. It's supposed to be here very soon but I'm not crossing my fingers since the due date has already been pushed out several times. Do note however that my support from Ciunas was top notch and shipped very quickly. It's just a new customs issue that's delaying shipments via TNT courier to the U.S. and Ciunas said they will use another courier next time.


----------



## kkrazik2008

RobertSM said:


> I'm coming from the Violectric V850 DAC. A delta sigma DAC that's been around for awhile. At least 5 years that I know of.
> 
> I had the Chord Hugo TT2 at my home for a weeks time during a loaner tour program last year. I liked it a great deal but I didn't think it was worth the price. It offered pre-amp features that I didnt need and I honestly felt like it didn't work for me.
> 
> The qutest on the other hand, I'm learning works very well. I have a very good headphone amp/pre-amp, the SPL Phonitor X w/DAC which I love. I've been using it for awhile now and really love it. The DAC module is okay. Good to have but nothing to write home about. I was seeking an upgrade to my sound and had really decided on the RME ADI DAC or the Qutest. Again, I think the RME is a great product but it had way more features than I needed. I spent ALOT of time reading this Chord Qutest thread and the Rob Watts thread on here. I decided that what Watts was doing with his algorithms and just his general views on sound was in my opinion very important. So, that's basically how I arrived to the qutest. And I have to say, so far so good. It doesn't sound exactly like the Hugo TT2 but it absolutely sounds like a sibling. I really feel like you get a great DAC for the money. And you get Watts and his special coding and ideas on sound. It's also what I needed...a pure DAC. So far so good, really very happy with it.


That is awesome, thank you for sharing and happy to hear your process to get there. I have the Mojo, which I enjoy in its own right due to the portability. In need of a DAC only solution, so the Qutest appeals to me very much on that front.  
Thanks again!


----------



## Zzt231gr

Triode User said:


> Thanks for that. As it happens I have an SBooster coming today for my Qutest to see if it displaces the MCRU power supply I currently use . . . . .


Hello sir!

Did you make the different PSU comparusons yet?


----------



## Triode User

Zzt231gr said:


> Hello sir!
> Did you make the different PSU comparusons yet?



Sbooster forgot to send the correct mini USB plug! The plug is arriving today also with the Sbooster Mk2 Ultra upgrade to try . . . .


----------



## Zzt231gr

Triode User said:


> Sbooster forgot to send the correct mini USB plug! The plug is arriving today also with the Sbooster Mk2 Ultra upgrade to try . . . .



🤦‍♂️

My MCRU is also tooooo late....


----------



## zjred

To my ears, the key difference between the power options is in the bass. A battery (Anker 3A powerbank) gives tighter bass. Sbooster with Ultra MK2 gives a thicker bottom end.

The differences are noticeable, but not day and night. The stock plug sounds ok if you want to save money. Sbooster gives you a power switch though.


----------



## RobertSM

Sorry if I'm a little late to the party so to speak. I've owned qutest for less than 24 hours.

I always value recommendations from veteran owners.

Is this the power supply that qutest owners like as an upgrade?

https://www.sbooster.com/botw-pp-eco-5v-6v/chord-qutest

Thanks!


----------



## Triode User

RobertSM said:


> Sorry if I'm a little late to the party so to speak. I've owned qutest for less than 24 hours.
> 
> I always value recommendations from veteran owners.
> 
> ...



I just got the sbooster and Ultra upgrade this morning to compare to the MCRU power supply and also probably to the Uptone LPS-1.2


----------



## GreenBow

Triode User said:


> Sbooster forgot to send the correct mini USB plug! The plug is arriving today also with the Sbooster Mk2 Ultra upgrade to try . . . .



Haha, so loads of people anxious to hear the results of you evaluation.


----------



## dac64

RobertSM said:


> Sorry if I'm a little late to the party so to speak. I've owned qutest for less than 24 hours.
> 
> I always value recommendations from veteran owners.
> 
> ...



Listen to the stock for sometimes, I preferred it to poweradd (battery) on my setup. And maybe you were able to pick up a used third-parties power supply along the way.


----------



## David M H

dac64 said:


> Listen to the stock for sometimes, I preferred it to poweradd (battery) on my setup. And maybe you were able to pick up a used third-parties power supply along the way.


+1 to this. 

I felt that the sound using the stock PSU was very close to using a battery, so I've not looked into LPS or alteratives. After a while on battery I decided it was possibly missing a tiny bit of edge, which I enjoyed when switching back to stock. But the sound was so close it could have just been psychoacoustic.


----------



## vinylvalet

The main problem with the stock power supply is not so much the resulting sound quality of the Qutest but the amount of noise it injects back into your AC distribution. That noise is clearly audible when playing LPs. Various power conditioning/filtering/isolation schemes didn't help. Adding a $49 ifi iPower 5V wall wart eliminated that noise completely. Back to a perfectly silent background during LP playback.


----------



## GreenBow

vinylvalet said:


> The main problem with the stock power supply is not so much the resulting sound quality of the Qutest but the amount of noise it injects back into your AC distribution. That noise is clearly audible when playing LPs. Various power conditioning/filtering/isolation schemes didn't help. Adding a $49 ifi iPower 5V wall wart eliminated that noise completely. Back to a perfectly silent background during LP playback.



Please what was the effect of the noise, so I can spot if I have it?


----------



## vinylvalet

As it's audible, t's either there or it isn't. If you hear background noise with volume turned up, no LP playing, you unplug the Qutest wall wart and the noise is decreased or, in my case, goes away completely, then you'll know. There can also be inaudible, high frequency noise injected back into the AC by the Qutest wall wart which can effect the SQ more subtly but I haven't tested for that.


----------



## GreenBow (May 31, 2020)

vinylvalet said:


> As it's audible, t's either there or it isn't. If you hear background noise with volume turned up, no LP playing, you unplug the Qutest wall wart and the noise is decreased or, in my case, goes away completely, then you'll know. There can also be inaudible, high frequency noise injected back into the AC by the Qutest wall wart which can effect the SQ more subtly but I haven't tested for that.



Many thanks. I do remember when I used an amp in my system, that my amplifer was silent. However I never had a Qutest then. I can't remember either what DAC I was using; it might have been Mojo or Hugo 2.

There have been changes, and at the moment I drive speakers directly from the RCA output of TT2. I will do some checking with the Qutest though, at it's here and handy to test.

(I have heard some mention of the Hugo 2 charger dumping noise back in to the mains. I think it would have the same charger as the Qutest. I never looked at them side by side yhough.)

I do use filtered mains banks and have my DAC power on a different filter mains bank than my analogue. That was a more recent thing though and could have had them mixed before. I never noticed any noise though. I will for sure test. Thanks again.

Worth noting though, that I did not always use mains filtered mains socket banks. If there was noise coming from my Hugo 2 PSU, then there is a chance I would heave heard it.

Am very interested now to test this.


----------



## HumanMedia

Worth noting that most of the noise we are talking about is not noticeable when there is no signal (music not playing volume right up) it is only noticeable when there is a signal and music playing as the noise modulates a signal. No signal, nothing audible to affect. It’s audible effect is a more forward lower treble, or a brashness or a harshness in the treble. Sometimes this can be perceived as sounding better “I heard things I’ve never heard before” , which may be because it is pushing parts of the frequency range that shouldnt be pushed and will ultimately be fatiguing and unnatural over a range of music.

IME the iFi Power supply was comparable to the stock supply but slightly inferior, bass was poorer. The UpTone LPS 1.2 also sounds bad with the Qutest. The BOBW v1 sounded ok but bass was too much somehow.


----------



## uzi2

An evening with Pi 4 and Gentle Giant

I have been experimenting with Raspberry Pi 4 as a test for the Allo Usbridge Signature, making sure that HQPlayer works well on the system. I am using a Pi4 running DietPi and NAA connected via USB to Qutest - Cambridge Azur - KEF R500   . HQPlayer desktop running on a remote PC - Sinc-M - LNS15 - max 768k -stock power supplies for Qutest and Pi

At startup of Pi it is very harsh, but soon mellows (guessing that loads of stuff causing interference and quiet when finished). It could be my ears tuning in or the Pi shutting up, but as the evening goes on the sound appears to improve (more wine maybe), but then Stephen Wilson's Three Piece Suite - it sounds so much better, I turn the volume up and really enjoy it. 
Not a scientific test, I know - more alcohol and better source will always win. Now to experiment with battery power for the Pi, before committing to the USBridge...


----------



## blueninjasix (Jun 3, 2020)

uzi2 said:


> An evening with Pi 4 and Gentle Giant
> 
> I have been experimenting with Raspberry Pi 4 as a test for the Allo Usbridge Signature, making sure that HQPlayer works well on the system. I am using a Pi4 running DietPi and NAA connected via USB to Qutest - Cambridge Azur - KEF R500   . HQPlayer desktop running on a remote PC - Sinc-M - LNS15 - max 768k -stock power supplies for Qutest and Pi
> 
> ...




I started my streaming adventure with USBridge Sig (and Shanti LPS) but I'm moving in the opposite direction to you and prefering Pi4. It's difficult to get the Sig to play nicely with Chord dacs unless you revert to software with an old Linux kernel like 4.14.92. Current software uses 4.19.115 but this tends to cause pops and crackles. I've had some success updating to the latest 5.4.42.  I'm currently running the Pi4 with the latest 64 bit beta software from Raspberry Pi Foundation together with HQPlayer's Network Audio Daemon also in 64 bit. I underclock the Pi4 and it runs perfectly using the similar settings you describe Sinc-L, LNS15 and 768k with a claimed 2 million taps!


----------



## uzi2

blueninjasix said:


> I started my streaming adventure with USBridge Sig (and Shanti LPS) but I'm moving in the opposite direction to you and prefering Pi4. It's difficult to get the Sig to play nicely with Chord dacs unless you revert to software with an old Linux kernel like 4.14.92. Current software uses 4.19.115 but this tends to cause pops and crackles. I've had some success updating to the latest 5.4.42.  I'm currently running the Pi4 with the latest 64 bit beta software from Raspberry Pi Foundation together with HQPlayer's Network Audio Daemon also in 64 bit. I underclock the Pi4 and it runs perfectly using the similar settings you describe Sinc-L, LNS15 and 768k with a claimed 2 million taps!


Are you using the stock power supplies? Will the Pi4 benefit from LPS or battery? What level do you underclock to? Sorry for all the questions, I need to do some experimenting...


----------



## blueninjasix

uzi2 said:


> Are you using the stock power supplies? Will the Pi4 benefit from LPS or battery? What level do you underclock to? Sorry for all the questions, I need to do some experimenting...


I don't use Roon but this page has lots of good info for config.txt
https://community.roonlabs.com/t/underclocked-pi-4-the-perfect-low-budget-77-usb-bridge/93743/36
I use Allo Shanti Linear Power Supply


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 3, 2020)

I did the audible test for the Qutest DAC PSU dumping noise in the mains and the noise coming over the amplifier.

I get a negative result and no noise detected. With my amplifier on, and the Qutest plugged in but no music playing, this was the result:

A faint buzz in the bass-mid driver (two way speakers). That was always there, and it heard it when this exact serial number amplifer was tested in the shop I bought it. I was looking for any noise that would annoy me, because my speakers are on my desk. Meaning even small noise would annoy if it were there.

However that faint buzz to be heard means putting my ear right up to the front of the speaker. It doesn't get louder with volume increase.

At about half volume on the amplifier, there is a faint buzz and slight hiss in the tweeter. At more volume the hiss increases, but is still very faint and needs ear right up to the tweeter.

I have my DAC PSUs and my amplifier plugs on different mains filtering socket banks. However they both come from the same wall socket. I could retest by simply putting my amplifier on the same socket board as the DAC.


----------



## uzi2

blueninjasix said:


> I don't use Roon but this page has lots of good info for config.txt
> https://community.roonlabs.com/t/underclocked-pi-4-the-perfect-low-budget-77-usb-bridge/93743/36
> I use Allo Shanti Linear Power Supply


Thanks for the link - There's a post in that thread which gives a full config for underclocking using only NAA like we both do.
I guess you use the Shanti to power both the Pi and the Qutest


----------



## blueninjasix

uzi2 said:


> Thanks for the link - There's a post in that thread which gives a full config for underclocking using only NAA like we both do.
> I guess you use the Shanti to power both the Pi and the Qutest


I started off using the Shanti to only power the Pi and then I experimented and used the other rail to also power the Qutest. It works well and I haven't found the need to go back to the stock Chord power supply. However, I have heard reports that it's not optimal to share the Shanti between two devices and that the Chord smps is as good as it gets. I'm undecided so have left the Shanti powering both.


----------



## uzi2

Having applied the underclocking config my Pi4 is now running much cooler - not quite to the levels of the firc heatsink/case, but acceptable using a large heatsink and aluminium case. It is now a black box with no lights - maybe this should be an option for the Qutest. I think it sounds better  and the Allo USBridge is now not on my wishlist. The next thing to test is powering the Pi from 4x NiMH AA - awaiting the battery box...


----------



## blueninjasix

uzi2 said:


> Having applied the underclocking config my Pi4 is now running much cooler - not quite to the levels of the firc heatsink/case, but acceptable using a large heatsink and aluminium case. It is now a black box with no lights - maybe this should be an option for the Qutest. I think it sounds better  and the Allo USBridge is now not on my wishlist. The next thing to test is powering the Pi from 4x NiMH AA - awaiting the battery box...


Having mastered the art of Pi, and spent a pittance in the process, compared to what others spend on pimping Bluenode 2is etc, you could now get a decent linear power supply.....


----------



## HumanMedia

blueninjasix said:


> I started off using the Shanti to only power the Pi and then I experimented and used the other rail to also power the Qutest. It works well and I haven't found the need to go back to the stock Chord power supply. However, I have heard reports that it's not optimal to share the Shanti between two devices and that the Chord smps is as good as it gets. I'm undecided so have left the Shanti powering both.



Yes running the two devices off the same power supply will defeat the galvanic isolation of the DAC.
However that still might be better overall than other negatives that two poorer quality supplies might bring to the table. Maybe.


----------



## uzi2

blueninjasix said:


> Having mastered the art of Pi, and spent a pittance in the process, compared to what others spend on pimping Bluenode 2is etc, you could now get a decent linear power supply.....


True, but if the NiMH battery pack works, I won't need one and will save so much more...


----------



## gearocdguy

Baten said:


> This is the best way to connect an RCA output to the THX amp, over its XLR input
> https://benchmarkmedia.com/products/benchmark-rca-to-xlrm-adapter-cable
> as recommended by Andrew, one of the engineers of the THX AAA tech.
> 
> ...



Baten - This is super interesting, my understanding (which is likely wrong) is that converting from RCA to XLR required some application as XLR sends two opposing signals that allow for easy noise rejection. I am assuming this is more a "hack" of the XLR cable that provides some additional benefit, but not the same benefit of true XLR.  I purchased the cables to see how well it works, although not with the THX tech. Do you have any idea if this would allow me to feed the Qutest into a passive XLR switch box and feed multiple components or would that nullify the benefit? I am also wondering how well this works on long runs?


----------



## Baten

gearocdguy said:


> Do you have any idea if this would allow me to feed the Qutest into a passive XLR switch box and feed multiple components or would that nullify the benefit? I am also wondering how well this works on long runs?


That would null the benefit, it's really meant for a straight connection. Long runs should be OK but for an unbalanced source, shorter tends to be better.


----------



## Paul Bjernklo

gearocdguy said:


> Baten - This is super interesting, my understanding (which is likely wrong) is that converting from RCA to XLR required some application as XLR sends two opposing signals that allow for easy noise rejection. I am assuming this is more a "hack" of the XLR cable that provides some additional benefit, but not the same benefit of true XLR.  I purchased the cables to see how well it works, although not with the THX tech. Do you have any idea if this would allow me to feed the Qutest into a passive XLR switch box and feed multiple components or would that nullify the benefit? I am also wondering how well this works on long runs?



I use these in a different use case from my Hugo 2 to the Benchmark AHB2 power amp. Before changing amp (without XLR in) using a direct USB connection from a Synology NAS I had a lot of noice, but after it was dead silent. Don’t know if the cable and/or power amp fixed it but it still surprised me with the difference. I know using a NAS directly is probably not a great source but mainly listen via a Cyrus CDXT Signature CD Transport, but it is now a good alternative...


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 5, 2020)

_ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio in Ireland. (includes power supply, two durable / hefty power cables shown and AC adapter. Shown with my micro USB to 2.1mm female adapter and Chord Qutest DAC)_

Incoming today with my Ciunas Audio ISO-PS supercapacitor power supply. Having read many outstanding reviews about this fine British craftsmanship I was expecting some nice improvements to the sound... but not like this! Immediately after just 5-min. warmup and A/B'ing it to a well mastered 90's rock song that I just listened to with the stock Qutest wall-wart PS... WOW. It took me a minute to process the difference in sound, but yup, it's all there AND MORE! Now we are entering hallowed territory of fine audio reproduction. Several more A/B comparisons between this and stock PS with a few test songs of both FLAC and DSD showed unequivocal improvements: I'm deeper into the reality of the recording, and I'm already hearing things I've never heard before such as subtle improvements in the mix / instrument separation in a good way. Perhaps best of all is it's smoother making the stock Qutest PS give off a modestly grainy / digital glare like sound, and this is something I hadn't noticed before. Absolutely nothing is over / under done - nothing is too bright / dark, small / big, etc. I guess like they say, you don't know what you're missing till you've tried it. I could live with this DAC setup forever.

All this and the ISO-PS is not even burned in yet! Not to mention my Qutest (as well as this) was being powered by my Furman IT Reference 15i Discrete Symmetrical AC Power Conditioner, and the ISO-PS was still able to make this much improvement (as was expected being that is for AC power filtering). Now with the DC power filter it's magic, and I'd recon this will make an improvement even plugged directly to the wall. Exciting times ahead!


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 5, 2020)

Oh also I thought it's fair to mention some of the amazing performance of my Qutest DAC is also thanks to my source chain. Laptop output via ASIO mode --> medium model Pangea USB cable --> iFi iPurifier --> Schiit Wyrd --> Singxer SU-1 digital audio interface --> Blue Jeans BNC coaxial cable --> Qutest, which is fed super clean supercapacitor power with the ISO-PS above.

And I forgot to mention everything sounds so much better now I want to listen louder, as if maybe less fatigue.


----------



## Zzt231gr

DecentLevi said:


> _ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio in Ireland. (includes power supply, two durable / hefty power cables shown and AC adapter. Shown with my micro USB to 2.1mm female adapter and Chord Qutest DAC)_
> 
> Incoming today with my Ciunas Audio ISO-PS supercapacitor power supply. Having read many outstanding reviews about this fine British craftsmanship I was expecting some nice improvements to the sound... but not like this! Immediately after just 5-min. warmup and A/B'ing it to a well mastered 90's rock song that I just listened to with the stock Qutest wall-wart PS... WOW. It took me a minute to process the difference in sound, but yup, it's all there AND MORE! Now we are entering hallowed territory of fine audio reproduction. Several more A/B comparisons between this and stock PS with a few test songs of both FLAC and DSD showed unequivocal improvements: I'm deeper into the reality of the recording, and I'm already hearing things I've never heard before such as subtle improvements in the mix / instrument separation in a good way. Perhaps best of all is it's smoother making the stock Qutest PS give off a modestly grainy / digital glare like sound, and this is something I hadn't noticed before. Absolutely nothing is over / under done - nothing is too bright / dark, small / big, etc. I guess like they say, you don't know what you're missing till you've tried it. I could live with this DAC setup forever.
> 
> All this and the ISO-PS is not even burned in yet! Not to mention my Qutest (as well as this) was being powered by my Furman IT Reference 15i Discrete Symmetrical AC Power Conditioner, and the ISO-PS was still able to make this much improvement (as was expected being that is for AC power filtering). Now with the DC power filter it's magic, and I'd recon this will make an improvement even plugged directly to the wall. Exciting times ahead!


Just wow!

How about bass performance-resolution?


----------



## DecentLevi

Definitely no slouch there, will test tomorrow it's 1am here


----------



## Zzt231gr

Initial impressions of the stock vs MCRU psu.

High frequencies,including cymbals and brushes,sound much softer,less grainy and more natural.The weird thing is that they are not -or are slightly-  lower in volume,which I am not sure that is a factor of a less noisy psu...

Mids,especially voices and brass,sound more natural and soft and when you hear a brass instrument playing together with cymbals,you can now hear them more distinctly and precisely-the stock psu makes them sound a little muddy together.

Bass,I am not really sure if I can hear a clear difference.

The tests are made with Analogue Productions CDs with 20-30sec playing intervals and listening specifically for minor differences...Which I am continuing.

I am not sure if I would easily pick the correct psu if I would listen only to one of them blindly,but I can easily pick the one playing if I hear them one after the other.

Any thoughts and opinions would be very appreciated!


----------



## Zzt231gr

More updates.

The MCRU sounds always more natural and more realistic with easily perceived and improved depth and layering!The separation between instruments is much better and it is more quieter!

The confusing part is that it almost always sounds a smidge brighter...Isn't this a sign of RF injection into the dac or the mains power lines?Or does this have to do with the much better resolution?


----------



## RobertSM

Judging by owners initial tests and real world usage it seems that qutest really does respond to quality power supply upgrades. And this totally makes sense to me. Our hobby it centered around power. Which for whatever reason usually seems to be an afterthought.


----------



## dac64

Zzt231gr said:


> Isn't this a sign of RF injection into the dac or the mains power lines?Or does this have to do with the much better resolution?



get one of these

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mini-OLED-...=18370976488938653ea21ccf472083f35494526aca91


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 5, 2020)

Zzt231gr said:


> Initial impressions of the stock vs MCRU psu.
> 
> High frequencies,including cymbals and brushes,sound much softer,less grainy and more natural.The weird thing is that they are not -or are slightly-  lower in volume,which I am not sure that is a factor of a less noisy psu...
> 
> ...


I'm also getting a smoother overall sound with my ISO-PS (power supply) from Ciunas Audio, but definitely not oeverdone, and a very nice type of smooth, as well as a more natural / organic lifelike sound that's something to behold. As well as the Qutest sounding a bit on the grainy / digital glare-like sound when going back to the stock PS. Yup I'm also hearing better "instrument separation" with my new PS on the Qutest as well, also making the stock PS sound more muddy in this regard as well. It's an uncanny good sound, really.


Zzt231gr said:


> More updates.
> 
> The MCRU sounds always more natural and more realistic with easily perceived and improved depth and layering!The separation between instruments is much better and it is more quieter!
> 
> The confusing part is that it almost always sounds a smidge brighter...Isn't this a sign of RF injection into the dac or the mains power lines?Or does this have to do with the much better resolution?


For me though I'm not hearing any added brightness with my new PS, and wanted to mention it almost seems you contradicted yourself in saying the cymbals and brushes sound much softer & grainy.

On your question about bass, no doubt it has good definition / authority and not overdone at all. Power conditioning in general can have a positive effect things like layering / soundstage / dynamics / smoothness but does not specifically alter the volume or balance of specific frequencies. Mine is heightening the overall experience equally and for me, while not explicitly declaring the ISO-PS better than other power filtering options, I am 100% satisfied and for any other system upgrades I would feel better focusing on other things such as RCA interconnects, headphones and the amp.


----------



## DecentLevi

My Qutest DAC is sounding so sublime now with this that I'm tempted to listen louder, and I believe day 2 of burn-in has further improved things.


----------



## dac64 (Jun 6, 2020)

If you are located in the US, the below works well with Qutest, or any digital gears. It comes with isolated outlets, and bring the noise level to 14mV.

Yes, the stock psu will inject noses into the line, ~40mV.

And it will be much better if you could have a dedicated line for digital only, and two poles Rcbo is better, not one pole MCB. 

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/wrk_api.htm


----------



## Zzt231gr

DecentLevi said:


> I'm also getting a smoother overall sound with my ISO-PS (power supply) from Ciunas Audio, but definitely not oeverdone, and a very nice type of smooth, as well as a more natural / organic lifelike sound that's something to behold. As well as the Qutest sounding a bit on the grainy / digital glare-like sound when going back to the stock PS. Yup I'm also hearing better "instrument separation" with my new PS on the Qutest as well, also making the stock PS sound more muddy in this regard as well. It's an uncanny good sound, really.
> 
> For me though I'm not hearing any added brightness with my new PS, and wanted to mention it almost seems you contradicted yourself in saying the cymbals and brushes sound much softer & grainy.
> 
> On your question about bass, no doubt it has good definition / authority and not overdone at all. Power conditioning in general can have a positive effect things like layering / soundstage / dynamics / smoothness but does not specifically alter the volume or balance of specific frequencies. Mine is heightening the overall experience equally and for me, while not explicitly declaring the ISO-PS better than other power filtering options, I am 100% satisfied and for any other system upgrades I would feel better focusing on other things such as RCA interconnects, headphones and the amp.


Dear friend,I did not explain well if I let you conclude that the cymbals are less grainy;the correct explanation is that they don't sound grainy with the aftemarket psu!


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 6, 2020)

dac64 said:


> If you are located in the US, the below works well with Qutest, or any digital gears. It comes with isolated outlets, and bring the noise level to 14mV.
> 
> Yes, the stock psu will inject noses into the line, ~40mV.
> 
> ...


Hmmm, not sure about those products from 24 years ago for $600+ with non-existent website. I'm in the U.S. and more than satisfied with my British P.S. from Cuinas Audio and it only cost me about $240 including shipping


----------



## Rob Watts

Zzt231gr said:


> More updates.
> 
> The MCRU sounds always more natural and more realistic with easily perceived and improved depth and layering!The separation between instruments is much better and it is more quieter!
> 
> The confusing part is that it almost always sounds a smidge brighter...Isn't this a sign of RF injection into the dac or the mains power lines?Or does this have to do with the much better resolution?


Yes it's a sign of more RF injected into the DAC, giving you more noise floor modulation, which in turn gives an impression of more details. But it's false, and it will increase listening fatigue...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Rob Watts said:


> Yes it's a sign of more RF injected into the DAC, giving you more noise floor modulation, which in turn gives an impression of more details. But it's false, and it will increase listening fatigue...


Thank you for your reply Mr. Watts!

But doesn't this contradict with the phenomenon of the high and mid frequencies sound way more organic and natural?How do you explain this?The difference is big and it is more enjoying and realistic listening to the aftermarket psu...

The background also sounds more darker.


----------



## dac64 (Jun 6, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Hmmm, not sure about those products from 24 years ago for $600+ with non-existent website. I'm in the U.S. and more than satisfied with my British P.S. from Cuinas Audio and it only cost me about $240 including shipping



Probably you can get it for $100 or less now.

It bought down the noises from 500mV or more from the line to 15mV, and prevented noises injecting to the line.

And it have isolated outlets, numbers
 depending on models.


----------



## dac64

On the power wedge too but not  the isolated outlet


----------



## Victorr

Rob Watts said:


> Yes it's a sign of more RF injected into the DAC, giving you more noise floor modulation, which in turn gives an impression of more details. But it's false, and it will increase listening fatigue...


If the audiophile decided to spend money on an expensive power supply, then nothing can stop him.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Victorr said:


> If the audiophile decided to spend money on an expensive power supply, then nothing can stop him.


I bought with a 30 day trial and I will return it if it won't satisfy me.Rob's opinion helps a lot!

More listening tests to come.


----------



## Jon L

Victorr said:


> If the audiophile decided to spend money on an expensive power supply, then nothing can stop him.



LOL, and it doesn't stop at only power supplies


----------



## HumanMedia

Have to get one of those EMI devices. But what is it actually measuring? Appears to be low frequency affects on the AC power. But I’m not sure if it is measuring the radio frequency interference at all, particularly the problematic 2.5 ghz range. My guess is that we would need a completely different instrument for that?


----------



## gearocdguy

Baten said:


> That would null the benefit, it's really meant for a straight connection. Long runs should be OK but for an unbalanced source, shorter tends to be better.


Just to follow up on the Benchmark RCA to XLR M adapters for anyone who is interested. I am trying to find the best solution (short of buying a second Qutest) to share the Qutetst between my headphone amp (Jotunheim) and my integrated amp (Krell KAV-400wi) about 15 feet away. Everything was tested against Qutest to Krell direct with Better Cables Silver Serpent RCA.

- I tried Seismic Audio 15' two-channel XLR cable (Amazon for $25) from the Jotunheim to the Krell, using the Jotunheim as a pre-amp with the Krell in theatre mode. Results were ok, but Schiit has a very different sound from Krell. I compared the $25 cable vs.1m Audioquest King Cobra XLRs and couldn't hear the difference (to be fair, my room acoustics are poor)

- I tried an Amazon Basics 15' RCA Cable - non-starter.

- I then tried the Benchmark RCA to XLR M adapter to Seismic Audio to Krell -  95% of Qutest to Krell via Silver Serpent Cables.

I also compared the Benchmark to Jotunheim vs Silver Serpent with my A2Cs. Silver Serpent's sounded better. But, I think that's more to do with the amp. I have tried both the RHNP and Drop THX but went with the Jotunheim because I like it better with grunge and the A2Cs. I generally put the headphones on when I want to listen to something loud. More civilized stuff gets shared with the masses. I imagine the Benmark RCA to XLR M would work well on the THX and RHNP with a pair of low impedance headphones and would perform better than similarly priced RCA cables.

My priors are you can get away with cheaper XLR cables than RCAs and the Benchmark adapter is doing something useful to help leverage the XLR. Maybe there is a $100 15' RCA that performs just as well, but doubtful.


----------



## Hooster

DecentLevi said:


> My Qutest DAC is sounding so sublime now with this that I'm tempted to listen louder, and I believe day 2 of burn-in has further improved things.



Thank you for sharing your experience. Seems like your Qutest has become more enjoyable to listen to. That being the case I wonder why Chord does not provide a better power supply out of the box and instead provides something that may not be on par with the rest of the product. A Qutest is not exactly cheap so you would think they could afford to do that.


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 6, 2020)

Zzt231gr said:


> More updates.
> 
> The MCRU sounds always more natural and more realistic with easily perceived and improved depth and layering!The separation between instruments is much better and it is more quieter!
> 
> The confusing part is that it almost always sounds a smidge brighter...Isn't this a sign of RF injection into the dac or the mains power lines?Or does this have to do with the much better resolution?





Rob Watts said:


> Yes it's a sign of more RF injected into the DAC, giving you more noise floor modulation, which in turn gives an impression of more details. But it's false, and it will increase listening fatigue...


Rob Watts is right about a how PS (power supply) can cause brightness by RF injected into the DAC. This RF that we are dealing with is an electrical noise which is way beyond our audio frequency band but found in electronic components in digital audio and causes brightness / harshness especially during music crescendos. This RF noise is not a hiss or hum noise we can hear when no music is playing, but is instead is only there when music is playing so it is riding on top of the music & not as a steady hiss or noise but varies, which Rob calls "noise floor modulation" - the noise floor isn't constant, it's modulating or varying - and also yup, also gives the impression of more details and increases listening fatigue.

So the brighter sound he is getting could be caused by the MCRU PS, (if not from poorly mastered digital songs); the RF sound that is present on the Qutest stock PS which has led every single user who has tried a decent aftermarket PS on the this DAC to prefer it to the stock PS. For the 5v PS from Ciunas Audio specifically, I was told it uses _particular pre-supercapacitor voltage regulators which are specially designed for eliminating/greatly reducing RF_. When said RF is removed, the result is that we often can / want to turn up the volume as that harshness / digital glare falls to the wayside and now the sound is more natural / lifelike. This improves the auditory perception by more faithfully reproducing the interplay in the music piece and characteristics of the sound - and with me for one, this is what I'm hearing with my chosen PS on the Qutest (ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio), not to mention more holographic sound reproduction which for me has enhanced well mastered analog-era songs and even digitally mastered movies alike.


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 6, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Rob Watts is right about a how PS (power supply) can cause brightness by RF injected into the DAC. This RF that we are dealing with is an electrical noise which is way beyond our audio frequency band but found in electronic components in digital audio and causes brightness / harshness especially during music crescendos. This RF noise is not a hiss or hum noise we can hear when no music is playing, but is instead is only there when music is playing so it is riding on top of the music & not as a steady hiss or noise but varies, which Rob calls "noise floor modulation" - the noise floor isn't constant, it's modulating or varying - and also yup, also gives the impression of more details and increases listening fatigue.
> 
> So the brighter sound he is getting could be caused by the MCRU PS, (if not from poorly mastered digital songs); the RF sound that is present on the Qutest stock PS which has led every single user who has tried a decent aftermarket PS on the this DAC to prefer it to the stock PS. For the 5v PS from Ciunas Audio specifically, I was told it uses _particular pre-supercapacitor voltage regulators which are specially designed for eliminating/greatly reducing RF_. When said RF is removed, the result is that we often can / want to turn up the volume as that harshness / digital glare falls to the wayside and now the sound is more natural / lifelike. This improves the auditory perception by more faithfully reproducing the interplay in the music piece and characteristics of the sound - and with me for one, this is what I'm hearing with my chosen PS on the Qutest (ISO-PS from Ciunas Audio), not to mention more holographic sound reproduction which for me has enhanced well mastered analog-era songs and even digitally mastered movies alike.



Are you talking about the battery PSU from Ciunas Audio …. https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/iso-ps

Some time back someone quoted a Rob Watts post, that battery power removes the noise in the 1GH to 2.5GH range. (Or I think that was the range.)

If you have a battery system, do you charge overnight and play during the day? I would be all for removing any noise that like if I have understood it right. However I would absolutely not prefer a battery powered music system. It's OK - fine, for those that are, and I am tempted myself. I know it would annoy me though if the power pack was not charged and I wanted sound. Can you charge and use those battery packs.

I don't know. I mean I never wanted a battery music system. Like when I had Mojo for my desktop DAC, I pined for it to not to be battery powered.

If I walked into a hifi shop and they said every thing in their was battery powered, I would leave. The idea of a battery powered hifi doesn't make sense. Not only would it be bad if the system was not charged, but batteries wear out - lifespan reduces. Honestly for that last iota of noise, I think I would take mains PSU. Mains PSU with the best filtering - even better.


----------



## DecentLevi

@GreenBow Yes it's the one linked above. It uses a supercapacitor which is similar to a battery but this PS is supposed to be left plugged in 24/7 then you turn on/off the DAC with the PS button in front. I don't know which frequencies are removed and a lot of the input for the above post was thanks to input of John Kenny the owner of Ciunas Audio, who BTW gives exceptional customer service. However judging by the fact there is no audible noise without an aftermarket PS, I am inclined to believe the my post above. Either way, I am currently embarking on sacred ground of puristic audio reproduction that is comparable to few systems I've heard in my lifetime, with their unit connected to my Qutest DAC and and the sound I'm receiving has totally slain that previously mentioned years-old teardown report from an unrelated product of theirs which seemed a bit suspicious at best.


dac64 said:


> Probably you can get it for $100 or less now.
> 
> It bought down the noises from 500mV or more from the line to 15mV, and prevented noises injecting to the line.
> 
> And it have isolated outlets, numbers depending on models.


That seems to be an AC filtering unit / power conditioner which is useless in cleaning up DC power which gets converted in the PS after the AC unit. I've tested my ISO-PS both with / without my professional studio quality multi-thousand $$ Furman power conditioner and heard 0 difference with or without, which shows this aftermarket PS is doing its' job right in isolating the power. OTOH my AC power filter does make a good audible improvement with my AC powered tube amp.



HumanMedia said:


> Have to get one of those EMI devices. But what is it actually measuring? Appears to be low frequency affects on the AC power. But I’m not sure if it is measuring the radio frequency interference at all, particularly the problematic 2.5 ghz range. My guess is that we would need a completely different instrument for that?


Unfortunately this is the wrong approach. As I touched on above, the type of noise at play here is inaudible RF noise that only exists when music is playing, so measurement would be very difficult. Here is a quote from the owner of Ciunas Audio:

_- "I can't hear any noise when I put my ear to the speaker" is a common retort seen in posts which misses the point - RF is not a hiss or hum or noise that is there when no music is playing - it's only there when music is playing so it is riding on top of the music & not as a steady hiss or noise but varies - this is what Rob calls "noise floor modulation" - the noise floor isn't constant, it's modulating or varying.
- we don't directly hear this noise as hiss or hum but rather we perceive it's secondary effects as brightness or harshness, particularly in music crescendos.
- judging a PS by its specified noise output is usually wrong as this is measured when there is no varying current being delivered - it's the noise under varying current delivery that is of importance & not cited (as it's very difficult to measure)_


----------



## ra990

In my experience with the Qutest, a good lithium ion battery pack that provides 5v, 2.4a+ output, will give you as clean as power as you can provide to it. I have a 28,600mah Anker battery pack that runs my Qutest for a good 3 or 4 days before needing recharging. I don't pickup anything from my mains this way. Sound is very clean.


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 6, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> @GreenBow Yes it's the one linked above. It uses a supercapacitor which is similar to a battery but this PS is supposed to be left plugged in 24/7 then you turn on/off the DAC with the PS button in front. I don't know which frequencies are removed and a lot of the input for the above post was thanks to input of John Kenny the owner of Ciunas Audio, who BTW gives exceptional customer service. However judging by the fact there is no audible noise without an aftermarket PS, I am inclined to believe the my post above. Either way, I am currently embarking on sacred ground of puristic audio reproduction that is comparable to few systems I've heard in my lifetime, with their unit connected to my Qutest DAC and and the sound I'm receiving has totally slain that previously mentioned years-old teardown report from an unrelated product of theirs which seemed a bit suspicious at best.





ra990 said:


> In my experience with the Qutest, a good lithium ion battery pack that provides 5v, 2.4a+ output, will give you as clean as power as you can provide to it. I have a 28,600mah Anker battery pack that runs my Qutest for a good 3 or 4 days before needing recharging. I don't pickup anything from my mains this way. Sound is very clean.



OK the last posts got me thinking about this.

Rob uses a Poweradd Pilot Pro battery pack, but I that might be for portability; (please don't quote me). Rob also said something about using capacitors (in the TT2) cleans the power too, but I recalled that vaguely.

I can't see any harm in buying one of these battery packs though. (A 5V would come in useful for any amount of gadgets.) When I think about it, if the batteries go flat I can always use the Chord PSU for a while. I luckily have the TT2 also, so I will be looking for a 15V one. I use my TT2 for music, and Qutest for everything else PC based.

It would be important for me to see if the batteries can be replaced in these portable power supplies though. Nothing worse than throwing a gadget away because the batteries wear out.


(Oddly though. I seem to remember Rob telling us running the 2Qute by battery didn't improve sound. Presumably that ran to the Qutest too.)


----------



## ra990

GreenBow said:


> I can't see any harm in buying one of these battery packs though. (A 5V would come in useful for any amount of gadgets.) When I think about it, if the batteries go flat I can always use the Chord PSU for a while. I luckily have the TT2 also, so I will be looking for a 15V one. I use my TT2 for music, and Qutest for everything else PC based.
> 
> It would be important for me to see if the batteries can be replaced in these portable power supplies though. Nothing worse than throwing a gadget away because the batteries wear out.
> 
> (Oddly though. I seem to remember Rob telling us running the 2Qute by battery didn't improve sound. Presumably that ran to the Qutest too.)


Yep, I remember that post. He was saying that a car battery is the best possible source of power, but second to that was a li-ion battery pack, and neither one showed any difference to the switching-mode power supply provided. His point was that you don't need to use anything except the provided power adapter. However, a li-ion battery pack is obviously cleaner and won't introduce any mains-related noise or interference into your Qutest and is very practical. I have two, so when one dies, I just swap it with the other and get that one charged up for my next rotation.


----------



## koven

I have a pair of Benchmark RCA to XLR cables for sale if anyone is interested, perfect for Qutest.


----------



## dac64 (Jun 7, 2020)

HumanMedia said:


> But I’m not sure if it is measuring the radio frequency interference at all, particularly the problematic 2.5 ghz range.



Yes, you are right about this, it only detect noise 10MHz and below.

However it does provide a tangible readings from the outlets for us to decide what to do next, or purely for pleasures.

E.g. all e-type transformers are isolated transformers, they will lower noise levels therefore there was a said that isolated trans help to improve sound quality.

And l also discovered that my plasma tv injected few hundreds of mV into the line when switching on therefore separating different lines for analogue and digital gears is a good idea.

Interesting finds!


----------



## dac64 (Jun 7, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> That seems to be an AC filtering unit / power conditioner which is useless in cleaning up DC power which gets converted in the PS after the AC unit. I've tested my ISO-PS both with / without my professional studio quality multi-thousand $$ Furman power conditioner and heard 0 difference with or without, which shows this aftermarket PS is doing its' job right in isolating the power. OTOH my AC power filter does make a good audible improvement with my AC powered...



Probably power wedge was some sort of AC conditioner.

It was laying around for more than two decades, and was the only conditioner I purchase throughout my entire hifi hobby.

It regained my interest after l bought an EMI meter.

Hifi is a strange hobby, a little bit of tweak could make a difference.

Or maybe it helps to isolate all my "clean-end" digital psu.

I will retry the poweradd to the qutest with the messy RFI solution.


----------



## uzi2

ra990 said:


> In my experience with the Qutest, a good lithium ion battery pack that provides 5v, 2.4a+ output, will give you as clean as power as you can provide to it. I have a 28,600mah Anker battery pack that runs my Qutest for a good 3 or 4 days before needing recharging. I don't pickup anything from my mains this way. Sound is very clean.


These power packs are ok for portable use, but as they are not native 5v they will indtroduce RF noise from the voltage switching. A power pack with 4 NiMH batteries (4.8 - 5.2v) is the only solution that does not require voltage switching.


----------



## Triode User

Before I start this I want to say that it is not my intention to conclude with a recommendation to buy any particular power supply. I just wanted to see if I could hear any differences between the stock power supply and the ones I tried and also whether I felt that the third party power supplies improved sound quality or otherwise.

Anyway, today I had a play with my Qutest and various power supplies.

Although a Dave is my main system DAC, I have a Qutest in another system and I must say I love its sound. I tend to have it on the Green filter (incisive with HF filter past 20kHz) and that is how it was left for this session. 

The Qutest sounds amazing with the Mscaler so this was included in the system. The source was an Innuos Statement connected by USB (Sablon 2020) to the Mscaler.

The Qutest output voltage was set to 3v and the Qutest was connected to a Music First Audio Classic V2 silver wound TVC passive preamp for volume conrol. The preamp connects to Pass Labs XA60.8 mono power amps which drive Spendor SP200 speakers.




I have been swopping between the supplies on an adhoc basis for a few days but today I settled down for a more structured session. 

In this session I was really looking for fairly clear and simple indicators to differentiate between the power supplies. Things such as whether the top end is more/less strident, whether percussive sounds are emphasised, whether there seemed to be more 'space' to the sound or indeed whether everything sounded ‘more lifelike’. To my mind many of these are indicators of RF noise and my inclination is generally to search out the exact opposite sound signature. I also paid particular attention to the bass and whether it seemed fuller or deeper and whether it had more or less detail to bass notes.

The power supplies listened to are pictured below -  
1) Factory supplied SMPS. 
2) PowerAdd Pilot Pro2 USB 2.1A outlet. approx £120
3) MCRU LPS (base version tested). £235, other options available £350 & £495.
4) Uptone UltraCap LPS-1.2.  $470 USD
5) SBooster BOTW MkII with optional Ultra MkII. £420
5) Sean Jacobs DC4 LPS (to the left under the table in first picture). £3,000



The test track I listened to was ' Biscuits' by Fink from the live album ' Wheels Turn Beneath My Feet'. This is a great album. Biscuits has various sounds which can quickly enable one to latch onto differences when making adjustments to a system. But as always one must be aware that a difference can at first be mistaken for an improvement when in reality it is exactly the opposite. For instance there is a repetitive rim tap throughout the track and this can be emphasised by some kit swopping and it is very tempting to think that this emphasis is more 'life like' or more 'realistic' when in reality it is just RF noise artifacts which are being heard and which can (will) ultimately lead to fatigue.

I am sure in my own mind that all the ones I tried have a smoother sound than the stock power supply. In varying degrees they all sounded less aggressive in the treble than the stock one. Sounds such as that rim tap were less 'in your face' and to me the sound was altogether more subtle but with also with more real detail to the shape of the percussive note which can then be heard when the overlaid crap is repoved. The battery was particularly good in this respect but I did feel that its bass performance suffered compared to the other supplies. The others had increasingly smooth top ends as one climbed in cost to the point where the better ones had an even more subtle soft top end than the battery but still with plenty of real detail and also they had a deep and firm bass.

So it is my conclusion that the power supplies I heard did make the Qutest sound different in my system and I am sure that what I heard was an real improvement, especially in the reduction of RF noise artifact induced harshness. 

Which did I choose? I personally have decided to go with the Sbooster with the Ultra MkII (the Sean Jacobs DC4 was not a viable option because of the cost and anyway it was borrowed from my Dave power supply!). How much, if anything, anyone else is willing to spend will depend on the perceived added sound quality in their system. In reality I would be happy with any of the ones I tried from the MCRU upwards with the exception of the battery mainly because it is unacceptable to me to have to charge batteries for a home system which is often in use for 12 hours every day. Note however that trying a battery (especially as it can be used for other purposes) is perhaps a good way to get a taste of the smoother top end that I am talking about.

One has also to bear in mind that what I heard in my system may not be heard by other people with their systems. Indeed some may not hear any difference from changing out the factory power supply. Please also bear in mind a health warning that any manufacturer is entitled to disallow a warranty claim if a third party power supply causes damage to piece of HiFi.

The over riding take away from this exercise is that I have renewed respect for the Qutest. It is a miniature gem which punches well above its weight and size.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Triode User said:


> Before I start this I want to say that it is not my intention to conclude with a recommendation to buy any particular power supply. I just wanted to see if I could hear any differences between the stock power supply and the ones I tried and also whether I felt that the third party power supplies improved sound quality or otherwise.
> 
> Anyway, today I had a play with my Qutest and various power supplies.
> 
> ...


Thank you for sharing your thoughts,Nick!

The thing is we disagree on the MCRU psu...In my system it was a tad brighter than the stock psu,which makes it a candidate for RFN modulation.

I will ship it back and I think I will try the Ciunas Suoercapacitor psu.


----------



## Jon L (Jun 7, 2020)

Triode User said:


> The over riding take away from this exercise is that I have renewed respect for the Qutest. It is a miniature gem which punches well above its weight and size.



Regardless of what different people experience with their Qutest PS experiments, I do believe the above statement will hold true.
Great work with all the comparisons, which I KNOW to be a lot of work.

The other factor to consider is what power conditioning is used with these power supplies.  I often find even bigger sound differences among power conditioners than actual power supplies plugged into them, with my preference being modified double-conversion on-line UPS to regenerate power.

One more option for those wanting to try pure battery PS without internal noisy regulation.  Just regular battery, to my ears, sound much better than those battery banks with conversion inside.  I made such a thing with 18650 batteries before for another component, which sounded fabulous and lasted a long time (5000 mAHx2), so I think I am going to try this with 1.2V rechargeable AA batteries. 
When I measure my Eneloop rechargeable 1.2V AA battery used for photography, it measures around 1.32V, so 4 of them will probably work.  Unfortunately, these are only 1900 mAH, but x4 will be 7600, x8 (parallel) will be 15,200 mAH, which will actually last some time. 




19733647013_232899f3e8_o by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## kkrazik2008

I decided to start reading all 300+ pages of this thread a few days ago, and there is some irony in that the recent discussion on PSU almost reads identical to the several pages found in p. 35-45. With so many other factors affect the audio chain, such as source, amplification, headphones, etc, why do the Chord threads always devolve into the PSU discussion? Maybe build a faraday cage to listen to your music? That should solve emi, RF, etc...

Enough of my unsolicited observations, I do have legitimate questions on using the Qutest as I currently am using the Mojo connected to an OTL and not satisfied with the synergy. I tried an older DAC in my stable, a Musical Fidelity V-DAC II and it was a better combination. I like the Chord sound signature, and looking to upgrade as my Mojo isn’t cutting it with the OTL. 

I am genuine in my curiosity of the Qutest as a stand alone DAC connected to an OTL amplifier. There are not only suggestions that the stock PSU is a limiting factor, but also suggestions that the unit is designed not to be paired to a headphone amplifier and the recommendation is the Hugo 2.

The reason for the OTL is to drive the ZMF Verite

What are the thoughts from the collective on my dilemma?


----------



## technobear

Jon L said:


> When I measure my Eneloop rechargeable 1.2V AA battery used for photography, it measures around 1.32V, so 4 of them will probably work.  Unfortunately, these are only 1900 mAH, but x4 will be 7600, x8 (parallel) will be 15,200 mAH, which will actually last some time.


Uh, uh! Oh no you don't.

You can add four cells in parallel to give the same voltage but four times the capacity

- or -

You can add four cells in series to give four times the voltage AT THE SAME CAPACITY


If we could do both, we wouldn't need fossil fuels any more.


So, 4 cells in series will give you 5.28V and 1900mAh capacity.

OK as a trial but for this to really fly you'll need to kick it up a notch or two and use 'D' cells.


----------



## uzi2

Triode User said:


> Before I start this I want to say that it is not my intention to conclude with a recommendation to buy any particular power supply. I just wanted to see if I could hear any differences between the stock power supply and the ones I tried and also whether I felt that the third party power supplies improved sound quality or otherwise.
> 
> Anyway, today I had a play with my Qutest and various power supplies.
> 
> ...


A very interesting comparison. One thing you don't state is what is powering the MScaler. Rob has suggested that the MScaler is more prone to RF noise than the Qutest. I guess that it is powered the same way with all the tests and I'm sure with all the kit you have to hand it is receiving the best possible clean power available.
My post above suggests trying NiMH. If you hear an improvement then go for a mains powered trickle charged capacitor solution like the Ciunas. Does this make sense to you?


----------



## uzi2

technobear said:


> Uh, uh! Oh no you don't.
> 
> You can add four cells in parallel to give the same voltage but four times the capacity
> 
> ...


AA NiMH are commonly available up to 3000mAh, but bigger brands at 2500mAh.I'm not sure what would happen as they discharge and voltage drops to 1.2 per battery and what this would do the Qutest. I'm planning to test them on a Pi4 before investing in LPS


----------



## Jon L

technobear said:


> So, 4 cells in series will give you 5.28V and 1900mAh capacity.


 
I'll just get two 4-cell holders and parallel them for 5.28V at 3800mAH.  
I have lots of Eneloop AA's already from photography/speedlites, so 8 AA's at work while another 8 is charged up ready to go


----------



## dac64

kkrazik2008 said:


> I am genuine in my curiosity of the Qutest as a stand alone DAC connected to an OTL amplifier. There are not only suggestions that the stock PSU is a limiting factor, but also suggestions that the unit is designed not to be paired to a headphone amplifier and the recommendation is the Hugo 2.



I'm an extremist, so be careful with what I said below:

I once connected a 2V output CD player directly to a power amp, marantz cd-63 to pass alpeh 5, the sound was unbelievable transparent.

You may try 1V output for a start from Qutest directly to OTL, first with low output CD media.


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 7, 2020)

kkrazik2008 said:


> I decided to start reading all 300+ pages of this thread a few days ago, and there is some irony in that the recent discussion on PSU almost reads identical to the several pages found in p. 35-45. With so many other factors affect the audio chain, such as source, amplification, headphones, etc, why do the Chord threads always devolve into the PSU discussion? Maybe build a faraday cage to listen to your music? That should solve emi, RF, etc...


I'm under the impression that most hobbyists who have reached the level of the Qutest have by this point more/less already tackled other areas of their chain such as source components and chosen a favorite headphone and amp, so now time to focus on interesting tweaks to further improve the sound. Just speculation though. And a faraday cage may not do anything with this as we're talking about interference that comes through a wire rather than through the airwaves, if I got it right.



kkrazik2008 said:


> Enough of my unsolicited observations, I do have legitimate questions on using the Qutest as I currently am using the Mojo connected to an OTL and not satisfied with the synergy. I tried an older DAC in my stable, a Musical Fidelity V-DAC II and it was a better combination. I like the Chord sound signature, and looking to upgrade as my Mojo isn’t cutting it with the OTL.
> 
> I am genuine in my curiosity of the Qutest as a stand alone DAC connected to an OTL amplifier. There are not only suggestions that the stock PSU is a limiting factor, but also suggestions that the unit is designed not to be paired to a headphone amplifier and the recommendation is the Hugo 2.
> 
> ...


I've compared the Mojo to the Hugo 2 and the improvement was night / day all across the board (can't provide many details as it's been a long time), so the Qutest should be a fine upgrade as it's very similar to the Hugo 2. The PSU may be a limiting factor, but there are options for around $250 shipped such as the Ciunas ISO-PS that can really improve the cost/performance ratio IMO. As for the Qutest not designed to be paired with a headphone amplifier - that's definitely not what I've seen on the forums nor in my experience, also not when visiting the Chord Electronics and vendor booths quite a few times at past CanJams - it's definitely for headphone amps.


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 8, 2020)

GreenBow said:


> Are you talking about the battery PSU from Ciunas Audio …. https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/iso-ps
> (...)


My mistake yesterday. No the one I ordered is this one:
https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/copy-of-supercapacitor-power-supply-dual-voltage-outputs. This one has dual outputs to power two devices and can be built for any required DC voltage (I selected 5v for both of the boxes to the right upon ordering). If you want the same with one DC output you can get this for only 150 EUR:
https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/5v-supercapacitor-power-supply

Here's a few more important quotes from the owner of Ciunas Audio:
(my) PS is powered by supercapacitors which are very different to batteries - they don't produce charge by chemical reaction for a start & so are very much faster & lower impedance, are far quicker to bring to full charge, don't suffer the lifetime issues that batteries do & aren't damaged by going below a minimum voltage. 

(many people) don't realise a very important aspect - direct power from battery or supercap is audibly far superior than when this power is routed through a voltage regulator - *all voltage regulators seen to suffer from transient response issues & create dynamic noise* when providing dynamic power to devices. This was something I discovered many years ago & my battery PS & now supercap PS are designed in this manner. The battery packs being talked about (on this thread) *all have voltage regulators on their outputs* & are far inferior sounding. A test of audibility will quickly demonstrate this, not looking at specs. 

If anybody wants to read into battery Vs supercapacitor power further, there's info on my website here.

And this guy discovered (many years after I was doing this) how dropping voltage regulators is audibly better by far i.e. using direct battery or supercap power.
A measurement shown here of a highly regarded linear power supply (Allo Shanti) when powering dynamically changing loads VS the same LPS but with supercaps added to the output.

RE the Allo Shanti, I was told that while it's a very good PS, it uses 2 small 10F supercapacitors on its' output for 5v and his use 3 larger supercaps outputting 350F, more than absolutely required giving more energy storage. Another issue reported with the Allo PS is residual power drains into any connected devices which may be a problem, but the ISO-PS isolates the outputs from the supercaps when switched off to prevent that.


----------



## GreenBow

DecentLevi said:


> My mistake yesterday. No the one I ordered is this one:
> https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/copy-of-supercapacitor-power-supply-dual-voltage-outputs. This one has dual outputs to power two devices and can be built for any required DC voltage (I selected 5v for both of the boxes to the right upon ordering). If you want the same with one DC output you can get this for only 150 EUR:
> https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/5v-supercapacitor-power-supply
> 
> ...



That's interesting. I wonder if it's like the supercaps in the TT2. 

Maybe you have effectively made a Qutest TT.


----------



## uzi2

DecentLevi said:


> My mistake yesterday. No the one I ordered is this one:
> https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/copy-of-supercapacitor-power-supply-dual-voltage-outputs. This one has dual outputs to power two devices and can be built for any required DC voltage (I selected 5v for both of the boxes to the right upon ordering). If you want the same with one DC output you can get this for only 150 EUR:
> https://www.ciunas.biz/product-page/5v-supercapacitor-power-supply
> 
> ...


John Kelly is so helpful. I thought I needed 2 units to power Pi4 and Qutest, but he he tells me it has two DC outputs, which should be sufficient to cover both. He has also researched the connectors as I will need micro for Qutest and USBC for Pi4. Looking forward to this...


----------



## Zzt231gr

Guys,I am also ready to buy a super capacitor psu,based on all the great reviews.

Does anyone know where to get a good quality 2.1mm male barrel to micro usb cable here in Europe?The stock cable of this device needs an adapter,which I am not so fond of...


----------



## uzi2

Zzt231gr said:


> Guys,I am also ready to buy a super capacitor psu,based on all the great reviews.
> 
> Does anyone know where to get a good quality 2.1mm male barrel to micro usb cable here in Europe?The stock cable of this device needs an adapter,which I am not so fond of...


They are difficult to get hold of outside of China. I opted for USB A adapters as I have both USBC and Micro USB adapters previously used for OTG from Android phones.


----------



## GreenBow

Zzt231gr said:


> Guys,I am also ready to buy a super capacitor psu,based on all the great reviews.
> 
> Does anyone know where to get a good quality 2.1mm male barrel to micro usb cable here in Europe?The stock cable of this device needs an adapter,which I am not so fond of...



The post I quoted and replied to, above your post, has a link for one. Post #4,919 of 4,921


----------



## Zzt231gr

GreenBow said:


> The post I quoted and replied to, above your post, has a link for one. Post #4,919 of 4,921


Thank you but I am not able to find it...Maybe it was removed or you pointed me to the wrong post?Could you please check again?


----------



## uzi2

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you but I am not able to find it...Maybe it was removed or you pointed me to the wrong post?Could you please check again?


I've found one in UK
They also had one for USBC, so I got both
It may be that there are other Pi specialists in Europe that would stock them.


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 9, 2020)

Zzt231gr said:


> Thank you but I am not able to find it...Maybe it was removed or you pointed me to the wrong post?Could you please check again?



My bad - sorry. I misread you post. I thought you were looking for the capacitor PSU. Whereas you were after a cable for one. (Have migraine and brain is not working properly.)


----------



## Zzt231gr

uzi2 said:


> I've found one in UK
> They also had one for USBC, so I got both
> It may be that there are other Pi specialists in Europe that would stock them.


Thank you but I am looking for a fixed cable-not an extra adapter...Like the Gotham from US.But this will cost me around €150 to import it here...



GreenBow said:


> My bad - sorry. I misread you post. I thought you were looking for the capacitor PSU. Whereas you were after a cable for one. (Have migraine and brain is not working properly.)


Search migraines through Nutritionfacts.org and maybe you will be able to be well fast and without medicine!Trust me,this Dr. helped me in many health problems...


----------



## technobear

Zzt231gr said:


> Guys,I am also ready to buy a super capacitor psu,based on all the great reviews.
> 
> Does anyone know where to get a good quality 2.1mm male barrel to micro usb cable here in Europe?The stock cable of this device needs an adapter,which I am not so fond of...


From your other posts, I am assuming you are looking for one cable to go into ISO-PS and Qutest.

In which case you are looking for a 5.5/2.5mm plug, not a 5.5/2.1mm plug.

As per the Cuinas web page: 



> Package also includes
> 
> two heavy gauge 5 Amp DC cables with a *2.5mm plug* to fit either of the two ISO-PS output sockets & a 2.1mm barrel plug to fit device being powred


----------



## Zzt231gr (Jun 10, 2020)

technobear said:


> From your other posts, I am assuming you are looking for one cable to go into ISO-PS and Qutest.
> 
> In which case you are looking for a 5.5/2.5mm plug, not a 5.5/2.1mm plug.
> 
> As per the Cuinas web page:


I don't know what are you reffering to but John from Ciunas said that the cable that connects to the Qutest must be a male barrel of 2.1mm on the other end.He will send me an adapter to convert the one end to micro usb but I want a cable with fixed ends.2.1mm barrel male  to micro usb male.


Edit.I think you are right!I am asking John for more details!Thanks for the clarification.

Do you happen to know a European vendor,dear friend?

Edit 2.Now this is more confusing...


----------



## uzi2 (Jun 10, 2020)

Zzt231gr said:


> I don't know what are you reffering to but John from Ciunas said that the cable that connects to the Qutest must be a male barrel of 2.1mm on the other end.He will send me an adapter to convert the one end to micro usb but I want a cable with fixed ends.2.1mm barrel male  to micro usb male.
> 
> 
> Edit.I think you are right!I am asking John for more details!Thanks for the clarification.
> ...


Yes it is - I'm sure you will sort it out with John.
I fully agree with the comment in the first pic. The Qutest should have had a better power supply input than microUSB and preferably with an on/off switch.
I'm not sure why you want to avoid an adapter. I can't see it causing any issues on a DC input. Any problems with going to very thin wires are unavoidable due to the microUSB. The contact patches of the barrel adapter are huge in comparison. The adapter I have linked has a short cable, so isn't going to put any additional strain on the microUSB socket.


----------



## HumanMedia (Jun 10, 2020)

Avoid those adapters they do affect the sound and make for a crazy awkward cable setup. Just get a custom cable made up for you at http://www.ghentaudio.com/part/list-dc.html

i can recommend the 4S6G variant with JSSG360 shielding. There are other higher gauge variants but they cannot be terminated into the tiny USB connector. (And yes I have the Gotham version and don’t like.)


----------



## uzi2 (Jun 10, 2020)

HumanMedia said:


> Avoid those adapters they do affect the sound and make for a crazy awkward cable setup. Just get a custom cable made up for you at http://www.ghentaudio.com/part/list-dc.html
> 
> i can recommend the 4S6G variant with JSSG360 shielding. There are other higher gauge variants but they cannot be terminated into the tiny USB connector. (And yes I have the Gotham version and don’t like.)


Please explain the problem with adapters.
Surely the problem is that the Qutest has a microUSB jack for power input.


----------



## JKenny (Jun 10, 2020)

I just registered on Head-Fi to clarify some confusion & clear up some things, not to get involved in technical discussions, etc

When Zzt231gr contacted me today about his confusion over cables, I asked him to post the following to this thread:


> Sorry for any confusion but normally the output sockets would be 2.5mm & if you were making your own cable that's the barrel plug you would need to plug into the back of the ISO-PS. But I am waiting delivery of some 2.5mm panel mounted sockets. I have a stock of 2.1mm panel mount sockets so I was intending to use these instead. With my supplied cables it doesn't make any difference which output I use as the cable will fit either way.
> 
> So for anybody who is using my supplied cables, it's immaterial to them.
> 
> For those who want to make their own cables then you will now need a 2.1mm barrel plug



I have hopefully clarified the text on all the areas in my website where cables are mentioned, including the user guide.


> Package also includes
> 
> one or two two heavy gauge, 5 Amp DC cable(s) with a 2.5mm barrel plug at one end & a 2.1mm barrel plug at the other end. These cables can be plugged either way into the new 2.1mm output socket which means the far end can be either a 2.1mm plug or 2.5mm plug for connecting to device being powered.
> a 12V or 24V charging PS.



The cables are reversible when plugging into the 2.1mm output sockets that I'm intending to now use (I've tried them today) which means you can either use the 2.1mm plug end of the cable to plug into device being powered or you can use the 2.5mm plug.

What this means is that if you are having 3rd party cables made you will want 2.1mm barrel plug (centre pin positive pole) & terminate the other end in an appropriate connector for the device you are intending to power for the Qutest it appears that a micro USB plug is required.

One other thing, I would appreciate Zzt231gr deleting my private communication with him some text of which he posted here - the screen shot of this text where I say "don't quote me on this" - as I said to him, it's not cool to publicly publish private communication especially when specifically asked not to. I presume it was inadvertent?

NB Why don't people just evaluate using an adapter & source a better cable at a later date?


----------



## uzi2

Thanks for your input John


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 11, 2020)

Hi @JKenny it's so cool to see you on here, the warrior engineer who managed to design a DC LPS with power as clean as it gets at a lower price than any I've found - from good 'ol Ireland no less!   . Not to mention I now won't have to be the go-between with paraphrasing your insights on this thread. And speaking of the DC purity, I would be interested to see someone compare your ISO-PS with the Qutest (normal powered version not the bring-your-own-battery version) to a _un-regulated_ battery supply. Although I'm not leaning towards the rechargeable battery route this would be the ultimate comparison nevertheless.



uzi2 said:


> Yes it is - I'm sure you will sort it out with John.
> I fully agree with the comment in the first pic. The Qutest should have had a better power supply input than microUSB and preferably with an on/off switch.
> I'm not sure why you want to avoid an adapter. I can't see it causing any issues on a DC input. Any problems with going to very thin wires are unavoidable due to the microUSB. The contact patches of the barrel adapter are huge in comparison. The adapter I have linked has a short cable, so isn't going to put any additional strain on the microUSB socket.


I've been using a 2.1mm barrel to micro-USB adapter with my ISO-PS on the Qutest, and while the sound is still fantastic, I'm inclined to believe that the DC current must be taking some sort of a hit on purity going thru the extra adapter with it's connections and internal wires of unknown gauge. I would also say that even though the final connection to the micro USB cable must be very thin strands, the overall gauge / isolation of the cable makes a difference. Just like how aftermarket headphone cables can make big improvements even though top headphones often use a single hair-thin strand of wire connecting to the driver / transducer.


HumanMedia said:


> Avoid those adapters they do affect the sound and make for a crazy awkward cable setup. Just get a custom cable made up for you at http://www.ghentaudio.com/part/list-dc.html
> 
> i can recommend the 4S6G variant with JSSG360 shielding. There are other higher gauge variants but they cannot be terminated into the tiny USB connector. (And yes I have the Gotham version and don’t like.)


Wow man you made my heart skip a beat, LOL... I already ordered a Gotham cable from them for around $100 including express shipping and it's just about on the way out to me. Any words on what you didn't like about the Gotham cable and what made your 4S6 cable any better? Any sonic differences or just the former was too hard to bend?


----------



## JKenny

Thanks Levi


----------



## HumanMedia (Jun 12, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Wow man you made my heart skip a beat, LOL... I already ordered a Gotham cable from them for around $100 including express shipping and it's just about on the way out to me. Any words on what you didn't like about the Gotham cable and what made your 4S6 cable any better? Any sonic differences or just the former was too hard to bend?



The majority of people love their Gothams. And the JSSG360 shielding is easy to do with the Gotham’s as they have three separated concentric shields already in the cable. However a small number of us have ultimately not been happy with them.

Here is my experience. Added the Gotham and It has an immediate liquid midrange and good bass. Great first impressions. However over the weeks and months I noticed a slight crunchiness in the treble in my system. I never associated it with the Gotham, I didn’t know where it came from . And then I read on Rajiv’s massive computer audio thread at AS that he wasnt happy with his Gotham due to something strange in the highs and had moved on from using it. Then I thought I would swap mine out with a different cable, and when I did that mysterious rough patch in the treble vanished. I felt immediate relief.  The Gotham was to blame, despite its great midrange and Bass.

That was just me and my system, and despite a small number of others finding the same, most people do not and are fine with it, love it even. Or maybe the midrange and bass outweigh any negatives in the highs, or it just doesn’t effect them.


----------



## DecentLevi

HumanMedia said:


> The majority of people love their Gothams. And the JSSG360 shielding is easy to do with the Gotham’s as they have three separated concentric shields already in the cable. However a small number of us have ultimately not been happy with them.
> 
> Here is my experience. Added the Gotham and It has an immediate liquid midrange and good bass. Great first impressions. However over the weeks and months I noticed a slight crunchiness in the treble in my system. I never associated it with the Gotham, I didn’t know where it came from . And then I read on Rajiv’s massive computer audio thread at AS that he wasnt happy with his Gotham due to something strange in the highs and had moved on from using it. Then I thought I would swap mine out with a different cable, and when I did that mysterious rough patch in the treble vanished. I felt immediate relief.  The Gotham was to blame, despite its great midrange and Bass.
> 
> That was just me and my system, and despite a small number of others finding the same, most people do not and are fine with it, love it even. Or maybe the midrange and bass outweigh any negatives in the highs, or it just doesn’t effect them.


But I would presume this harshness in the highs would have a lot to do with the synergy between LPS and DAC. Were most of those people who experienced this using the ISO-PS with the Qutest, or a different pairing? Which system was yours with the Gotham cable?


----------



## Joe-Siow (Jun 12, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> But I would presume this harshness in the highs would have a lot to do with the synergy between LPS and DAC. Were most of those people who experienced this using the ISO-PS with the Qutest, or a different pairing? Which system was yours with the Gotham cable?



I'm personally using the Uptone JS-2 LPS with the Plixir Statement DC cord via an adapter. Zero harshness there.
Plixir also makes some great LPS and power conditioners

https://www.plixirpower.com/products/the-statement-dc-power-cable


----------



## HumanMedia

DecentLevi said:


> But I would presume this harshness in the highs would have a lot to do with the synergy between LPS and DAC. Were most of those people who experienced this using the ISO-PS with the Qutest, or a different pairing? Which system was yours with the Gotham cable?



I don’t know what an ISO-PS is, I was using the Gotham with an Uptone JS-2 and the Qutest. I also tried a Gotham with my streamer with the same results. Both Gotham’s are out of the system bagged up for sale, or in case I temporarily need a cable for a new component. It does bring a lot to the table and for most it’s positives will far outweigh the negatives only a few seem to experience. Note that the Gotham is a pretty generic (microphone?) cable, the main reason for its current audiophile popularity is that its triple shielding makes it very easy to DIY the JSSG360 shielding to it without buying and adding copper braid and Teflon tape. When you buy it from Ghent as a JSSG30, he will do this for you. God Knows what it sounds like when used as the manufacturer intended with all shields tied at either end.


----------



## HumanMedia (Jun 15, 2020)

A few of my notes on what makes a good DC cable for digital are:
*star quad geometry
*JSSG360 shielding
*Gauge as thick as possible

secondary to these but also important
* purity, OFC and better helps
* Lower dialectic Values for the insulation, foamed Teflon is my favourite, what is it called?PFTE?

Note that I have left out the metal type, I’m a copper Man, but all of the above applies to silver as well. And those who generally shun silver for analog interconnects, find it is good for digital interconnects.

For purely analog DC power, I would leave out the shielding and go for as pure metal as possible, as higher gauge as possible with foamed Teflon dialectric (insulator)

Well thats my opinion / experience anyway.


----------



## DecentLevi

I got my Gotham DC cable today, this one. It's certainly thick almost 1CM, and only bends minimally. I was excited to try it between my LPS the ISO-PS and Qutest, but DARN! I realized that somehow the DC cable doesn't fit. I ordered 2.1mm barrel opening and it seems as if the LPS may have a 2.5mm pin in the center of its' DC outputs. Realizing I have something called a Pin Vise Model Hand Drill Set (a manual drill I have for adding bass ports for closedback headphones), I thought I'd try to enlarge the internal hole closer to the 2.5mm to try to make it fit. 




I spent at least 1/2 hour meticulously trying to widen the hole of the Gotham cable with metal shards all around and barely got it to fit in the ISO-PS. Note this method is NOT recommended and may be liable to damage connected components. @JKenny I thought you said the internal diameter is supposed to be 2.1mm?

For the sound, I immediately noticed what could be an even larger soundstage with nice velvety liquid mids and good authority to the bass. However, also as mentioned about the Gotham DC cable it does have a certain harshness in the treble. Still a smooth treble not grainy, but somehow overtly detailed and almost as if somehow a nuance disjointed. Later in the evening I did get the chance to A/B the sound of the Gotham cable with the stock cable that shipped with ISO-PS, though I'm not going to do it frequently due to the makeshift way I have the Gotham cable attached. My above impressions were accurate. Somehow simply having a heftier DC cable indeed increased the soundstage, bass fullness / definition, liquid mids, overall smoothness and life-likeness! Just with this it's a touch too detailed in the highs which doesn't work well for me since I have treble sensitivity. 



HumanMedia said:


> Avoid those adapters they do affect the sound and make for a crazy awkward cable setup. Just get a custom cable made up for you at http://www.ghentaudio.com/part/list-dc.html
> 
> i can recommend the 4S6G variant with JSSG360 shielding. There are other higher gauge variants but they cannot be terminated into the tiny USB connector. (And yes I have the Gotham version and don’t like.)


So I'm interested to try your cable recommendation. Knowingly I can't exchange mine anymore, but at least your suggestion is cheaper. Is the 4S6G DC cable you linked still the one you'd recommend that meets most of your recommendations you mentioned in the post above? But it doesn't seem to have JSSG360 shielding, unless I'm missing something. Both appear to be copper material. And I think I'll have to request directly for a micro-USB connection on this cable since that doesn't seem to be an option on their website. And in your opinion, would you say this cable 'sounds' good and fixes the aforementioned quality of the treble? I'm hoping you could respond soon, thanks.


----------



## uzi2

@DecentLevi , I believe John said in his recent post that he was intending to use 2.1mm making the cables reversible. Yours had already been built and shipped,so used the 2.5mm to 2.1mm connectors.


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 16, 2020)

Just read through that post you linked, and your post still both confuse me with scant details on which side of which cable have which width and reference of timeframe, the way I read it seems like they lean closer towards 2.1mm connectors. And its' need for a 2.1mm to micro USB adapter added to the confusion.

Per the above I got word back from Ghent Audio they can add  JSSG360 shielding and a micro USB connection to the 4S6G cable for just a little extra. @HumanMedia is this still your main DC cable recommendation?


----------



## JKenny

DecentLevi said:


> Just read through that post you linked, and your post still both confuse me with scant details on which side of which cable have which width and reference of timeframe, the way I read it seems like they lean closer towards 2.1mm connectors. And its' need for a 2.1mm to micro USB adapter added to the confusion.
> ....


To clear up any confusion - from now on the output connectors on the ISO-PS will be 2.1mm
Prior to this they were 2.5mm sockets

I can't make it clearer than that.


----------



## nwavesailor (Jun 16, 2020)

I'm bailing on this thread..............only some much PS chit-chat I can take! 

Truth be told, I traded in my Qutest (Great DAC!) and snagged a TT2 so this is not info I need.


----------



## kkrazik2008

nwavesailor said:


> I'm bailing on this thread..............only some much PS chit-chat I can take!
> 
> Truth be told, I traded in my Qutest (Great DAC!) and snagged a TT2 so this is not info I need.


+ 1
Too many damn posts about power supply, isn’t their separate threads for that talk??
I am still trying to read through the early posts and there’s a second round of power supply chatter. Any bets on how many more when I finally get caught up?


----------



## nwavesailor

I know @DecentLevi REALLY gets into all things audio and tweaks from his Garage 1217 days as well as Feliks audio.

Once he bought a Qutest, it then became a challange for him to make it mo' betta!


----------



## uzi2 (Jun 16, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Just read through that post you linked, and your post still both confuse me with scant details on which side of which cable have which width and reference of timeframe, the way I read it seems like they lean closer towards 2.1mm connectors. And its' need for a 2.1mm to micro USB adapter added to the confusion.
> 
> Per the above I got word back from Ghent Audio they can add  JSSG360 shielding and a micro USB connection to the 4S6G cable for just a little extra. @HumanMedia is this still your main DC cable recommendation?



I can't see what the confusion is. John used to make his ISO-PS with 2.5mm outputs and supplied cable 2.5mm to 2.1mm. In future the ISO-PS will have  2.1mm outputs, so the cable will be reversible. Your unit was supplied before this change was made...
In view of recent posts, perhaps it is best that we go back to more specific Qutest topics


----------



## dac64 (Jun 16, 2020)

kkrazik2008 said:


> + 1
> Too many damn posts about power supply, isn’t their separate threads for that talk??
> I am still trying to read through the early posts and there’s a second round of power supply chatter. Any bets on how many more when I finally get caught up?



Qutest is great! HMS make it perfect! Opt DX/Wave bring it to the end game! and together with nwavesailor , you may leave now!


----------



## dac64 (Jun 16, 2020)

duplicate


----------



## kkrazik2008

dac64 said:


> Qutest is great! HMS make it perfect! Opt DX/Wave bring it to the end game! and together with nwavesailor , you may leave now!


I’m not going anywhere, still have 229 pages to read  
I will probably have the Qutest in hand once I can find it for a good deal.


----------



## dac64

kkrazik2008 said:


> I’m not going anywhere, still have 229 pages to read
> I will probably have the Qutest in hand once I can find it for a good deal.



let us know if you need any advice after you got the Qutest. btw, the stock psu works for me.


----------



## DecentLevi

nwavesailor said:


> I know @DecentLevi REALLY gets into all things audio and tweaks from his Garage 1217 days as well as Feliks audio.
> 
> Once he bought a Qutest, it then became a challange for him to make it mo' betta!


Heck YES! Tech modding guru all the way yo! I think I've (somehow? ) brought my propensity to hack things from my teen days of repurposing car stereos for room use, interphasing early 3D visor with a VCR and putting on tape manipulation displays at high school... to the Head-Fi heydeys of today... you know, this crazy magical world of _how will a certain coductor color the sound_,_ how tubes routed in parallel expand the soundstage_ and even helping a headphone modding startup find the right sound with vent ports. I guess that's what this crazy alternate reality of the hi-fi hobby is to me.

I get you guys' drift though about keeping things more on the Qutest. That's the same thing I was feelin' in the thick of the DC LPS discussions too. Overwhelmed and SICK of it. But suffice it to say that the Qutest is a GEM of a DAC and with tweaks the likes of clean power and even a good DDC (I've got the Audio GD DI-20 90/98M on the way), along with feeding it well mastered source material - the sound can be absolutely splendid and really something to behold!

I can try to focus my posts somewhat more on the Qutest itself, and of course such amazing sound with said tweaks wouldn't have been possible without such an otherworldly DAC in the first place. Do bear in mind though there are yet a few of us on this thread still with DC LPSs incoming, so I think we should give them a little time on in the spotlight too so they can tell us what effects these do _indeed _have on the sound.


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 17, 2020)

It just struck me that Qutest might run without an amplifier. I mean in a similar fashion to using TT2 without an amplifier.

If it was running from a PC with a variable volume output, and Qutest set to 2V or 3V. Then RCA plugs to speaker cables. It might not have enough volume, and it might put too much power drain on the Qutest though.

If I run TT2 directly into speakers at 3V though. It's often too much volume for driving from a PC set at max output. However I do run music at only quiet to normal volumes. TT2 can get loud though, and I barely get near 3V on it. Maybe in very quiet sections in games or video.


----------



## uzi2

GreenBow said:


> It just struck me that Qutest might run without an amplifier. I mean in a similar fashion to using TT2 without an amplifier.
> 
> If it was running from a PC with a variable volume output, and Qutest set to 2V or 3V. Then RCA plugs to speaker cables. It might not have enough volume, and it might put too much power drain on the Qutest though.
> 
> If I run TT2 directly into speakers at 3V though. It's often too much volume for driving from a PC set at max output. However I do run music at only quiet to normal volumes. TT2 can get loud though, and I barely get near 3V on it. Maybe in very quiet sections in games or video.


I've got mine set at 3V for running direct to planar headphones. The digital volume control in HQPlayer works very well with comfortable listening generally in the range of -15 to -20db depending on the source.


----------



## RobertSM

I'm running my qutest 3V into my SPL Phonitor X. Phonitor X runs in a slave through configuration straight out via RCA cables to a Woo Audio WA6-SE. I also exclusively use the green filter. I just set it and forget it. Really super happy!


----------



## HumanMedia (Jun 18, 2020)

DecentLevi said:


> Just read through that post you linked, and your post still both confuse me with scant details on which side of which cable have which width and reference of timeframe, the way I read it seems like they lean closer towards 2.1mm connectors. And its' need for a 2.1mm to micro USB adapter added to the confusion.
> 
> Per the above I got word back from Ghent Audio they can add  JSSG360 shielding and a micro USB connection to the 4S6G cable for just a little extra. @HumanMedia is this still your main DC cable recommendation?



Yes that’s the one, it’s a custom order, and my recommendation for a great low end DC cable for the Qutest. It does have one downside compared to the Gotham - a slightly rolled off bass. But that is it, it sounds immediately cleaner and more neutral in all other areas and to me, preferable.. Note that the 4S8 has no bass roll off but is too high a gauge for the micro usb. I have also tried the higher priced Neotech found it sounded slow and plodding, maybe due to it not being star quad, so it’s inductance will be 3 times higher.

That is my extent of Low end DC cable experience but I’m sure there is huge scope for doing even better. The Audiophile style guys that moved on from Gotham’s went to much higher priced options, in particular a Canadian sourced Silver DC cable that they swear by. I don’t have details on hand, will have a look later.

But for me right now the 4S6G with JSSG is the best of the low cost options that can fit that microUSB connector. For all other components in my system I am moving to 4S8 With JSSG360 which really are great (but also a special order). I am content enough with the 4S6G on the Qutest to focus on other area of my system, without jumping up to (much) higher priced options. But if I were to come back to it I would consider DIYing a DC cable based on the VHAudio V-Quad™ Cu21 raw cable with the Oyaide barrel connectors, microUSB connector and copper braid and Teflon tape for the JSSG treatment.

If anyone is wondering about the JSSG360 shielding is all about, it literally creates a Faraday cage around the cable keeping all externally radiated noise out.


----------



## Hooster

RobertSM said:


> I'm running my qutest 3V into my SPL Phonitor X. Phonitor X runs in a slave through configuration straight out via RCA cables to a Woo Audio WA6-SE. I also exclusively use the green filter. I just set it and forget it. Really super happy!



But why not run your Qutest straight into the Woo Audio?


----------



## RobertSM

Hooster said:


> But why not run your Qutest straight into the Woo Audio?



Two reasons.

1. In this configuration I get the best of both worlds. I get access to soild state amplification. Sometimes I'm in the mood for lightning fast PRaT and want a reference level sound that the Phonitor X offers. I also have access to both balanced and single-ended headphone outputs.

2. I get the added benefit of the qutest running through the Phonitor X and all its benefits. By benefits I mean its clean voltage rails and it's capacitors. As I use it, Phonitor acts as a pre-amp. I use it in a slave-out configuration. Meaning the signal doesn't get run through the volume pot circuit. It's just passes through. It's the same idea as to why a pre-amp in a two-channel system adds to the overall character and tone before the signal gets sent out to the speakers, or headphones in my case.

I have actually done personal ear testing. Chord qutest straight to the Woo Audio WA6-SE sounds great! Very good. With the Phonitor X it adds weight, depth and a greater 3-D texture. More instrument separation and a deeper soundstage. To my ears, it's absolutely an improvement.

Good question.


----------



## DecentLevi

HumanMedia said:


> Yes that’s the one, it’s a custom order, and my recommendation for a great low end DC cable for the Qutest. It does have one downside compared to the Gotham - a slightly rolled off bass. But that is it, it sounds immediately cleaner and more neutral in all other areas and to me, preferable.. Note that the 4S8 has no bass roll off but is too high a gauge for the micro usb. I have also tried the higher priced Neotech found it sounded slow and plodding, maybe due to it not being star quad, so it’s inductance will be 3 times higher.
> 
> That is my extent of Low end DC cable experience but I’m sure there is huge scope for doing even better. The Audiophile style guys that moved on from Gotham’s went to much higher priced options, in particular a Canadian sourced Silver DC cable that they swear by. I don’t have details on hand, will have a look later.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your input. I ordered the above DC cable earlier. Weird how a DC cable could effect the bass quantity, I'll see if it's the same on mine. And yeah please share the info. on the Canadian silver DC cable they swear by when you can find it, just for reference.


----------



## RobertSM

Just adding a picture for fun.

Macbook-->qutest-->phonitor x-->woo audio wa6se.

Headphone listening options, single-ended or balanced from the Phonitor X or single-ended from WA6SE


----------



## Hooster

RobertSM said:


> Two reasons.
> 
> 1. In this configuration I get the best of both worlds. I get access to soild state amplification. Sometimes I'm in the mood for lightning fast PRaT and want a reference level sound that the Phonitor X offers. I also have access to both balanced and single-ended headphone outputs.
> 
> ...



Thanks for your detailed response, much appreciated. I am a bit disappointed to hear that the WA6-SE needs help in terms of weight, depth and 3-D texture, but I guess it is what it is.


----------



## RobertSM (Jun 18, 2020)

Hooster said:


> Thanks for your detailed response, much appreciated. I am a bit disappointed to hear that the WA6-SE needs help in terms of weight, depth and 3-D texture, but I guess it is what it is.



I understand. And please, I'd never want to be apart of any negative words or feelings  regarding Woo Audio. I'm a big fan of what they do. I was actually communicating with Mike this week on another issue.

Let me also say that this set-up works for me. And to my ears it pleases me. Some people have a different opinion saying that anytime you add another component into the system you degrade the sonic purity. Maybe they are right, for themselves. That's the beautiful thing in this hobby, we all choose to build a rig that is pleasing to us. Not a fellow Head-Fi member or anyone else. Not what a audiophile critic says. It's just what we enjoy.

But I stand by my opinion, to me and for me, qutest to, the Phonitor X to the WA6SE sounds better, than without Phonitor. But, what do I know. Lol

Enjoy the music friends!


----------



## Hooster (Jun 18, 2020)

RobertSM said:


> But I stand by my opinion, to me and for me, qutest to, the Phonitor X to the WA6SE sounds better, than without Phonitor. But, what do I know. Lol



Your opinion is totally respected and appreciated. For the price of the Phonitor plus the Woo Audio you may find yourself better served with something like the ALO Studio Six. You would save in terms of cables and space and who knows, it may sound even better.


----------



## GreenBow

By the way, there is a cable review of RCA and speaker cable in the current Jul 2020 HiFi Choice.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Hey guys!

I just started a thread about aftermarket psu!

Please share your experience there!Thanks.


----------



## Triode User

Zzt231gr said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> I just started a thread about aftermarket psu!
> 
> Please share your experience there!Thanks.



a link?


----------



## Zzt231gr

Triode User said:


> a link?


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/poll-aftermarket-qutest-psu.935548/#post-15694659

Sorry.Here you are!


----------



## Chop-Top

Zzt231gr said:


> Sorry.Here you are!


OMG Thank you!  don't think I can take another psu posting.


----------



## dac64

Chop-Top said:


> OMG Thank you!  don't think I can take another psu posting.



In this hobby, we are listening to power!


----------



## Focux

hello all, any recommended rca cables for qutest? am looking at clearway, aq golden gate and qed performance 40 and kimber base series. thanks all


----------



## technobear

Focux said:


> hello all, any recommended rca cables for qutest? am looking at clearway, aq golden gate and qed performance 40 and kimber base series. thanks all


Atlas Element Integra - OCC copper for half the price of Clearway


----------



## mvule

I swear by Audioquest Big Sur. 
Think it's the next one up in the range but worth it in my personal experience. 
Hope this helps.


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 23, 2020)

Focux said:


> hello all, any recommended rca cables for qutest? am looking at clearway, aq golden gate and qed performance 40 and kimber base series. thanks all



Post #4,965 of 4,973

https://www.whathifi.com/search?searchTerm=interconnects


----------



## Focux

Might go with either QED Reference Audio 40 or Integra. Why is the clearway so lauded upon tho? It frankly “looks cheaper” than its peers in a similar price bracket


----------



## gearocdguy

Focux said:


> hello all, any recommended rca cables for qutest? am looking at clearway, aq golden gate and qed performance 40 and kimber base series. thanks all


If you are going to balanced inputs - I highly recommend these https://benchmarkmedia.com/products/benchmark-rca-to-xlrm-adapter-cable as recommended by Batten on this forum.


----------



## ScornDefeat

Another power question from somebody on here won't be too popular...but I will shoot my shot lol. I searched and haven't seen a definitive answer.

Has anyone tried an in-line microUSB switch with the Qutest? If so, any recommendations? I hate that it's on 24/7 lol


----------



## Focux

gearocdguy said:


> If you are going to balanced inputs - I highly recommend these https://benchmarkmedia.com/products/benchmark-rca-to-xlrm-adapter-cable as recommended by Batten on this forum.



my amp does have balanced inputs but I doubt I would hear a diff tbh

besides, I’ve not seen this being sold anywhere locally. Thanks for the recommendation tho, I’ve heard good things abt it


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 24, 2020)

Here's very highly regarded RCA cable option I've been eyeing:

This is a DIY option for anyone who's willing to have their own cable put together. VH Audio Pulsar Cu II, which "uses a solid 24 AWG UniCrystal OCC copper center conductor. The Pulsar Cu II is VH Audio's 'Statement' copper based design for true 75 ohm digital SPDIF applications, and its use for shielded analog interconnects is so profoundly good- it will compete favorably with ANY shielded interconnect on the market, regardless of price."



VH Audio recommended this with their ETI LINK copper connectors and combine it with their professional heatshrink, sleeving and solder found here.
Note: you would need 6 feet for a 3-foot / 1m cable (1x for each R and L), and should first contact VH audio for specifics about putting it together.


----------



## DecentLevi

Does anyone here have the Audio-GD DI-20? I got this DDC today new for a pretty penny all the way from China and I am deeply disappointed I can't get its' BNC coax output to pair with the Qutest, which is the only common connection between the two! I posted more details here. Or has anyone otherwise experienced an issue with the Qutest not recognizing some devices with BNC output?


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 24, 2020)

On the above BNC input issue, I'm under the assumption that the Qutest BNC coax input must have a built-in transformer that causes a compatibility issue with the BNC output of my Audio-GD DI-20 DDC which uses a special "ACSS" 2nd generation coaxial technology (more here). Can anyone back up my theory on this? So I'm planning to use a RCA to BNC coax cable to the Qutest as a workaround, allowing a connection from the DI-20 "standard" coax port rather than BNC ACSS version.

Also apologies for reverting to the LPS topic for a moment, but nobody had an answer on the other thread yet, so here it is: Does anyone have an opinion if gradual voltage build up and decrease is likely to damage the Qutest if turned on / off this way? With some LPSs the supercapacitor is wired directly to the DC output, causing power built up in the supercaps to drain out into the Qutest for a few minutes after power off, and likewise gradually build up to the 5v on powering up. I've done it this way a few times before with no issues but I would like to know if this is likely to cause any long-term damage to the Qutest if power cycled like this every day?

@Rob Watts would you clue us in on the BNC transformer and gradual power cycle question please?


----------



## uzi2

The same question would also be relevant to anyone considering using a NiMH battery power pack in view of the gradual voltage drop as the batteries are drained.


----------



## dac64 (Jun 25, 2020)

Power surge is more harmful (to the capacitors) therefore big amp usually deploy relays.

If an amp was left for too long, good to start it up with a variable transformer to charger the capacitors.

I don't think there was a transformer. I saw the internal pcb before. Just some smd after the bnc.

Maybe your gd not conformed to AES3 standard.


----------



## Rob Watts

DecentLevi said:


> On the above BNC input issue, I'm under the assumption that the Qutest BNC coax input must have a built-in transformer that causes a compatibility issue with the BNC output of my Audio-GD DI-20 DDC which uses a special "ACSS" 2nd generation coaxial technology (more here). Can anyone back up my theory on this? So I'm planning to use a RCA to BNC coax cable to the Qutest as a workaround, allowing a connection from the DI-20 "standard" coax port rather than BNC ACSS version.
> 
> Also apologies for reverting to the LPS topic for a moment, but nobody had an answer on the other thread yet, so here it is: Does anyone have an opinion if gradual voltage build up and decrease is likely to damage the Qutest if turned on / off this way? With some LPSs the supercapacitor is wired directly to the DC output, causing power built up in the supercaps to drain out into the Qutest for a few minutes after power off, and likewise gradually build up to the 5v on powering up. I've done it this way a few times before with no issues but I would like to know if this is likely to cause any long-term damage to the Qutest if power cycled like this every day?
> 
> @Rob Watts would you clue us in on the BNC transformer and gradual power cycle question please?



The BNC inputs are designed to work with 768kHz inputs, and this precludes using transformers, as they typically are too slow. It is a very sensitive input, much less than 1v peak to peak, and set to 75 ohms.

Qutest was not designed for use with slow ramp up and ramp down PSUs, and although it shouldn't damage the FPGA (as the PSUs start-up and shutdown sequence is controlled via precision enables) I can't guarantee the rest of the circuitry. Not using the stock PSU invalidates the Chord warranty, so this is very much at your risk.


----------



## Focux

out of curiosity does anyone turn off their qutest when not listening or leave on 24/7 as per the manual?


----------



## Triode User

24/7 on for me,


----------



## dac64 (Jun 25, 2020)

Btw, the built (or the claims) of  *DI-20* just like a little WADAX


----------



## gearocdguy

Focux said:


> my amp does have balanced inputs but I doubt I would hear a diff tbh
> 
> besides, I’ve not seen this being sold anywhere locally. Thanks for the recommendation tho, I’ve heard good things abt it



You can buy them on Benchmarkmedia website

Based on my experience they sounded better from the Qutest into both my Krell KAV-400xi and my Jotunheim compared to both the Audioquest Big Sur and Better Cables Silver Serpents. The Big Sur's where fine, the Silver Serpents sound a little quicker, but the Benchmarks sounded cleaner as I believe they reduce some of the noise caused by magnetic interference from the gaggle of wires. Where I can't use the benchmark adapters, I am using the silver serpents.

They are particularly good to my Krell as it as across the room and I found a good place online to get custom cable XLRs and a reasonable price. I got 2x25' Canare StarQuad L-4E6S with the Neutrik connects for around $60 plus shipping (Redco Audio). The website said two weeks and he turned them around in a day.


----------



## jwbrent (Jun 25, 2020)

Focux said:


> out of curiosity does anyone turn off their qutest when not listening or leave on 24/7 as per the manual?



Generally, DACs perform best when they reach thermal stability. Of all the DACs I’ve owned, I’ve always left them on so there is no warm up needed. No moving parts for reliability concerns.


----------



## dac64

DecentLevi said:


> On the above BNC input issue, I'm under the assumption that the Qutest BNC coax input must have a built-in transformer that causes a compatibility issue with the BNC output of my Audio-GD DI-20 DDC which uses a special "ACSS" 2nd generation coaxial technology (more here). Can anyone back up my theory on this? So I'm planning to use a RCA to BNC coax cable to the Qutest as a workaround, allowing a connection from the DI-20 "standard" coax port rather than BNC ACSS version.



Why not toslink to the qutest directly? We'd not know what have DI did to the data.


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 26, 2020)

dac64 said:


> Btw, the built (or the claims) of  *DI-20* just like a little WADAX


If I read you right you're praising the DI-20 for being close to another product touting to be the peak of digital quality. It's certainly heralded as one of the best DDC's made according to owners, and for me I've already heard a huge improvement with my USB source even into my mid-fi iFi iDSD Black lablel DAC/AMP via the DI-20.


dac64 said:


> Why not toslink to the qutest directly? We'd not know what have DI did to the data.


The only common connection type between the DI-20 and Qutest is BNC, which doesn't include Toslink. I've got a special BNC/RCA cable on order to try to get around the compatibility issue between that connection type.


----------



## uzi2

Focux said:


> out of curiosity does anyone turn off their qutest when not listening or leave on 24/7 as per the manual?


I can't see in the manual where it recommends leaving it on 24/7
It does say that it is "designed to be permanently connected to a power supply", but nowhere does it state that the power supply should be permanently switched on. I take that more as a warning not to frequently plug/unplug the fragile microUSB connector. After all it does have the feature of remembering your settings, which would be redundant if powered on 24/7


----------



## Focux

uzi2 said:


> I can't see in the manual where it recommends leaving it on 24/7
> It does say that it is "designed to be permanently connected to a power supply", but nowhere does it state that the power supply should be permanently switched on. I take that more as a warning not to frequently plug/unplug the fragile microUSB connector. After all it does have the feature of remembering your settings, which would be redundant if powered on 24/7



fair enough that's true..


----------



## Christer (Jun 26, 2020)

Focux said:


> fair enough that's true..


Yep that micro usb connection is the ONE most annoying thing with Qutest imho.
I change between the stock and my preferred battery PSU when needed, ie battery down.
And it is always with fear I try to fit that horrible little thing into that micro connection.

I guess a proper connection would obviously have been far too expensive for Chord?
Profit margins  before customer satisfaction unfortunately seems to be the rule they follow.

Having listened to Rob's podcast interview I was quite shocked to hear how absolutely  ridiculously narrow the parts used margins can be in this business.

5 cents too much !!!!
And a whole project dropped!

That quote makes it a lot easier to put in perspective and understand why so many go to such great lengths to improve on stock products.
I was under the impression that at least DAVE was a cost no object product at its time of introduction?
I also maybe wrongly,correct me if I am wrong, but interpreted his comments on his upcoming "in the next year or so "amp thing" to have a linear PSU unit!
Is the real reason for the lack of linear PSUs on Dave and Qutest and TT2 also simply " too expensive"?
Cheers CC


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> Yep that micro usb connection is the ONE most annoying thing with Qutest imho.
> I change between the stock and my preferred battery PSU when needed, ie battery down.
> And it is always with fear I try to fit that horrible little thing into that micro connection.
> 
> ...



Christer, I think the 5 cents too much comment was in relation to his former life prior to Chord? However I think that Rob has previously said that each Chord digital product has a parts target cost before the project starts. 

The amp 'thing' to which you refer is surely the long awaited and oft mentioned digital amp . . . .?


----------



## Christer (Jun 26, 2020)

Triode User said:


> Christer, I think the 5 cents too much comment was in relation to his former life prior to Chord? However I think that Rob has previously said that each Chord digital product has a parts target cost before the project starts.
> 
> The amp 'thing' to which you refer is surely the long awaited and oft mentioned digital amp . . . .?


Hello Nick, yes that is what I think as well, in both cases.  I used the "five cents" as an example of sometimes very annoying compromises made within a given budget.
The "amp thing" as you say not before 2022 probably or  not even that soon judging by the Davina progress.
And I still think Chord sort of operates within similar stringent,saving half a penny if they can, parts budgets.
The micro usb  on Qutest is a very clear such sign to me.

My now oldish Benchmark DAC 2 HGC which when I bought it sold for about the same price as a Qutest is MUCH sturdier built, and has got both PRO QUALITY connections and lots of them!
I've even seen it used as monitoring headphone amp at classical recording sessions.
Qutest is a better dac, yes but I am still using the headphone amp of my DAC 2 with Qutest/HMS with both HD800 and HEKV2 with quite satisfying results.
And the DAC 2 headphone amp delivers enough current to run both at the same time should I wish to do so.
If you have been trying different ways of powering your Qutest over the stock supply, don't you also find it annoying with that little micro  usb plug which at least I can't  see properly what's up or down on without my reading glasses without lifting the little brick?
And moving it is out of the question since I am using the Wave  Storm and my Mscaler with my Qutest 100% of the time. Without the Mscaler Qutest is just another good dac among others to me.
The flimsy tiny, fragile little socket is probably not at all made to last very long under such circumstances as plugging in and out regularly?
IMO  a VERY annoying compromise.

PS when can we read your about Power supply comparisons with your Qutest by the way?
Or has it already been posted and I missed it?
Headfi is acting very erratically as far as alerts and new posts are concerned on my mbp.
Cheers CC


----------



## uzi2

Christer said:


> Yep that micro usb connection is the ONE most annoying thing with Qutest imho.
> I change between the stock and my preferred battery PSU when needed, ie battery down.
> And it is always with fear I try to fit that horrible little thing into that micro connection.


I use an inline switch permanently attached to Qutest, Any switching of cables can then only wear that out. It sounds like it would be particularly useful with a battery pack.This is the sort of thing. They can often be found from Raspberry Pi suppliers, but even the Pi now uses USBC


----------



## DecentLevi

I'd say the reason a micro-USB connector was chosen for the Qutest was so it can be as mobile friendly as possible for the "mobile-first" crowd (gen-z / alpha teens who have never touched a real PC) so they can connect it to who knows what mobile method. I for one can proudly say I'm not one of 'them'   (not entirely anyway LOL)



Christer said:


> (...)
> PS when can we read your about Power supply comparisons with your Qutest by the way?
> Or has it already been posted and I missed it?
> Headfi is acting very erratically as far as alerts and new posts are concerned on my mbp.
> Cheers CC


I'm not sure when any comparisons will be made or if it may even include a new custom LPS I've heard about, but any of these would be posted on the new dedicated thread thread for Qutest power supplies:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/poll-aftermarket-qutest-psu.935548


----------



## uzi2

DecentLevi said:


> I'd say the reason a micro-USB connector was chosen for the Qutest was so it can be as mobile friendly as possible for the "mobile-first" crowd (gen-z / alpha teens who have never touched a real PC) so they can connect it to who knows what mobile method. I for one can proudly say I'm not one of 'them'   (not entirely anyway LOL)


But it's just the power connector and the power supply is included. The original Hugo and 2Qute had barrel connectors.Why fix what isn't broken?


----------



## HumanMedia (Jun 27, 2020)

uzi2 said:


> But it's just the power connector and the power supply is included. The original Hugo and 2Qute had barrel connectors.Why fix what isn't broken?



Agree, and I know that someone accidentally broke that micro USB socket, it is overly fragile. And I am sure DecentLevi is correct about making it more usable to mobile users who could have 5V microUSB supplies on hand. Why else Change the design to accept 5V then have to internally convert that back to 12v internally with a switcher, when the two previous incarnations of the Qutest (Qute HD and 2Qute) accepted 12v directly with a sturdy DC barrel connector?

IMO the change was misguided as using different supplies is strongly advised against, verbotten even, so why make a connection and additional voltage switcher to support commonly available non-stock supplies?  Bring back 12v input with a DC barrel connector!


----------



## DecentLevi (Jun 26, 2020)

Making the Qutest more accessible to mobile-only users with a powerbank friendly power connection then heralding that using any other PSU's void the warranty could be seen as a double standard... so can the (lack of) power switch encouraging people to leave it on 24/7 so we can upgrade again after it croaks.

Oh well look at the bright side, when the Qutest wears out from being left on all year at least we can upgrade to the next succession, and knowing Chord it should honestly be something amazing. At least we can get reliable sonic improvements with aftermarket PSU's on the Qutest even with its' internal step-up switcher - and for that, the Qutest is still a keeper for me.


----------



## RobertSM

Me too! I love my qutest, quirks and all!


----------



## Hooster

Christer said:


> And I still think Chord sort of operates within similar stringent,*saving half a penny if they can, parts budgets*.
> The micro usb  on Qutest is a very clear such sign to me.



I agree and I find it very annoying since they are selling their products at a premium price.


----------



## Triode User

DecentLevi said:


> Making the Qutest more accessible to mobile-only users with a powerbank friendly power connection then heralding that using any other PSU's void the warranty could be seen as a double standard... so can the (lack of) power switch encouraging people to leave it on 24/7 so we can upgrade again after it croaks.
> 
> Oh well look at the bright side, when the Qutest wears out from being left on all year at least we can upgrade to the next succession, and knowing Chord it should honestly be something amazing. At least we can get reliable sonic improvements with aftermarket PSU's on the Qutest even with its' internal step-up switcher - and for that, the Qutest is still a keeper for me.



I frequently leave much of my HiFi on 24/7. One amplifier has been been switched on for 18 years and has only been switched off when we moved houses. In that time I have only had to replace the power supply caps 3 years ago. I mostly prefer kit to be permanently powered up on the basis that switch on power surges can be just as harmful. 

I doubt that leaving the Qutest switched on is any issue at all.


----------



## The Jester (Jun 27, 2020)

A little worried about the micro USB connector too ... so bought a little 100mm “extension cable” that remains plugged into the Qutest so a possible removable battery pack in the future wouldnt be an issue ...
having said that I’ve had no issues with my Nikon camera that uses the same micro USB connection for downloading photos...
doubtful that “ penny-pinching” is the main reason for the micro USB socket ... electronics store I got the extension cable from sells a pcb micro USB socket for $2.95 ... the more common round DC pcb mount connector is 95c..


----------



## ra990

I've been using the Qutest on and off since it's release and I've never had an issue with the micro USB connector. And I'm plugging/unplugging it quite often. I actually like that it uses that connector because I run my Qutest on USB power banks. I find it sounds noticeably better than being plugged into the wall. I have high capacity batteries and I just swap them every few days when they get low. My Qutest stays on all the time.


----------



## jwbrent

Triode User said:


> I frequently leave much of my HiFi on 24/7. One amplifier has been been switched on for 18 years and has only been switched off when we moved houses. In that time I have only had to replace the power supply caps 3 years ago. I mostly prefer kit to be permanently powered up on the basis that switch on power surges can be just as harmful.
> 
> I doubt that leaving the Qutest switched on is any issue at all.



Yes, this is correct, unless a component is specifically designed to reduce power on surge, turning a component on can stress internal componentry thus shortening its life. I generally left my system on all the time as well.


----------



## jwbrent

jwbrent said:


> Yes, this is correct, unless a component is specifically designed to reduce power on surge, turning a component on can stress internal componentry thus shortening its life. I generally left my system on all the time as well.



By the way, this is the reason when there is a black out, unplug your gear. The power on surge following a black out can really do a number on the power supply of your components.


----------



## MWeston

Hi all,

I've had a Qutest for a few weeks now and I'm having an issue with the USB driver, I think.  I get pops and clicks all of the time!  I've had that with other DACs once in a while when my computer gets busy, maybe once every other day.  The Qutest is popping away constantly, like every 5-10 minutes.  I've rebooted the computer and I have numerous programs that are always open (my work computer) so I can't really change too much.

Has anyone had the same issues and found a solution?  At first I thought it was just Audacious but I've heard it while watching Youtube videos.  I might have to try other programs but it's never been much of an issue with other DACs so who knows.


Thanks!


----------



## ra990

MWeston said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I've had a Qutest for a few weeks now and I'm having an issue with the USB driver, I think.  I get pops and clicks all of the time!  I've had that with other DACs once in a while when my computer gets busy, maybe once every other day.  The Qutest is popping away constantly, like every 5-10 minutes.  I've rebooted the computer and I have numerous programs that are always open (my work computer) so I can't really change too much.
> 
> ...


Have you tried using WASAPI exclusive mode instead of ASIO in your audio application? I find that WASAPI usually doesn't have any of the clicks or pops that ASIO can be plagued with.


----------



## MWeston

ra990 said:


> Have you tried using WASAPI exclusive mode instead of ASIO in your audio application? I find that WASAPI usually doesn't have any of the clicks or pops that ASIO can be plagued with.


Hi,

That sounds like a great idea.  I haven't messed with the audio settings in Windows before.  It looks like that is something you do in each application so I will have to mess around with it and see if I can find a program that gives me that option.  It would be nice if this was a global change for all of Windows though.  Again, my inexperience is showing here!


Thanks!


----------



## jwbrent

MWeston said:


> Hi,
> 
> That sounds like a great idea.  I haven't messed with the audio settings in Windows before.  It looks like that is something you do in each application so I will have to mess around with it and see if I can find a program that gives me that option.  It would be nice if this was a global change for all of Windows though.  Again, my inexperience is showing here!
> 
> ...



Good luck, it’s always a drag when a new audio toy doesn’t work as it should. My reaction when that happens ...


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 5, 2020)

MWeston said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I've had a Qutest for a few weeks now and I'm having an issue with the USB driver, I think.  I get pops and clicks all of the time!  I've had that with other DACs once in a while when my computer gets busy, maybe once every other day.  The Qutest is popping away constantly, like every 5-10 minutes.  I've rebooted the computer and I have numerous programs that are always open (my work computer) so I can't really change too much.
> 
> ...



Yeah I think it's what ra990 said. Using Direct Sound driver with Chord DACs in the way past caused pops and clicks for me. Moving to bit-perfect cured it.

If you don't have a media player that runs bit-perfect, then maybe trial one. JRiver has a month trial, and that's what I bought after trialling it.


----------



## technobear

MWeston said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I've had a Qutest for a few weeks now and I'm having an issue with the USB driver, I think.  I get pops and clicks all of the time!  I've had that with other DACs once in a while when my computer gets busy, maybe once every other day.  The Qutest is popping away constantly, like every 5-10 minutes.  I've rebooted the computer and I have numerous programs that are always open (my work computer) so I can't really change too much.
> 
> ...


What USB cable are you using? Surprising how often that turns out to be the culprit.


----------



## MWeston

technobear said:


> What USB cable are you using? Surprising how often that turns out to be the culprit.


I'm just using the cable that came with the Qutest.  I ordered a cable that should connect my Qutest to my Fiio M11 to see how well that DAC mode works.  I also ordered some BNC cables/adapters but I'd still like my PC to work since that is my main source.  I've just got to figure out this bit perfect stuff.  I think that will do it.  My thanks to everyone who gave me great advice here!


----------



## theaudiologist1

Hugo 2 or Qutest or Pro iDSD? Which one is the best?


----------



## gearocdguy

theaudiologist1 said:


> Hugo 2 or Qutest or Pro iDSD? Which one is the best?



Hugo 2 and Pro iDSD are both DACs and Amps. Qutest is just a DAC. So, if you buy Qutest you also need to purchase and Amp.

Hugo 2 is a mobile device with a battery. iDSD is a desktop device.

So, the first question is how are you going to use it?


----------



## theaudiologist1

gearocdguy said:


> Hugo 2 and Pro iDSD are both DACs and Amps. Qutest is just a DAC. So, if you buy Qutest you also need to purchase and Amp.
> 
> Hugo 2 is a mobile device with a battery. iDSD is a desktop device.
> 
> So, the first question is how are you going to use it?



I have a portable DAC I use as a desktop amp. And I need a DAC+AMP combo, so Qutest is out. 

So I guess between idsd and hugo 2. Which one?


----------



## gearocdguy

theaudiologist1 said:


> I have a portable DAC I use as a desktop amp. And I need a DAC+AMP combo, so Qutest is out.
> 
> So I guess between idsd and hugo 2. Which one?



Go big and get the Hugo 2 TT.


----------



## theaudiologist1

gearocdguy said:


> Go big and get the Hugo 2 TT.


that's way out of my price range. It's $1000 more than the pro idsd


----------



## gearocdguy

I have never heard the idsd, 

If you are not going to use the Hugo 2 as a mobile device. Get the Qutest and a separate headphone amp. The advantage is you can better match your amp to your headphones.


----------



## GreenBow (Jul 7, 2020)

gearocdguy said:


> I have never heard the idsd,
> 
> If you are not going to use the Hugo 2 as a mobile device. Get the Qutest and a separate headphone amp. The advantage is you can better match your amp to your headphones.



Have always found that a tricky area. I always felt, if you have no use for a headphone amp/port, always buy the Qutest.

If you did want a headphone port, then the decision becomes trickier. I bought Hugo 2 for direct headphones access to the native sound. However I upgraded  with TT2 because I felt overall it was the right option all round. 

There was a problem for me with having Hugo 2 on RCA duty and headphone duty. That was always remembering to turn the Hugo 2 volume down, before attaching headphones. A few times I blasted me ears with high volume. Once I plugged in some IEMs to Hugo 2, but forgot to put them in my ears. (Must have started doing something else.) Anyway when I eventually picked up my IEMS I found they had been running with Hugo 2 at line out volume. No idea how they survived, but I guess they must have been high volume capable with ease.

In my opinion Chord should make two versions of the Hugo 2. The version we have. Then another specific desktop version without batteries. One that has separate volume memories for RCA and headphone ports, like the TT2 does.


----------



## uzi2

GreenBow said:


> In my opinion Chord should make two versions of the Hugo 2. The version we have. Then another specific desktop version without batteries. One that has separate volume memories for RCA and headphone ports, like the TT2 does.


The problem there is if you take away the batteries you remove the noise isolation. You can use super capacitors instead, but then you are back to the TT2.


----------



## gearocdguy

uzi2 said:


> The problem there is if you take away the batteries you remove the noise isolation. You can use super capacitors instead, but then you are back to the TT2.



I think was mentioned on the thread, but this is a good interview with Rob (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rob-watts-of-chord-electronics/id1332323668?i=1000479531934). He discusses the challenge of building mobile devices given you have limited amounts of power to use. I have not heard the Hugo 2, but in Darko's review, he compared them directly and believe the Qutest sounds better. If you have noisy mains IFI sells a "clean" wall wart or you can run the Qutest off the same kind of lithium-ion power hub you use to charge your phone or laptop.


----------



## uzi2

gearocdguy said:


> I think was mentioned on the thread, but this is a good interview with Rob (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rob-watts-of-chord-electronics/id1332323668?i=1000479531934). He discusses the challenge of building mobile devices given you have limited amounts of power to use. I have not heard the Hugo 2, but in Darko's review, he compared them directly and believe the Qutest sounds better. If you have noisy mains IFI sells a "clean" wall wart or you can run the Qutest off the same kind of lithium-ion power hub you use to charge your phone or laptop.


My Qutest runs off LPS with super capacitors, so I guess the comparison should be with the TT2, but you can't compare them directly as one is a pure DAC and the other a DAC/Amp. It is not only the power source that differs.


----------



## gearocdguy (Jul 8, 2020)

uzi2 said:


> My Qutest runs off LPS with super capacitors, so I guess the comparison should be with the TT2, but you can't compare them directly as one is a pure DAC and the other a DAC/Amp. It is not only the power source that differs.



It all depends on your use case.

If you want just a DAC and nothing but the DAC - get the Qutest.

If you want a DAC, a battery, and a portable amp get the Hugo 2.

If you want a DAC, a power supply, a pre-amp, and a desktop headphone amplifier get the TT2.

And, if you want to obsess over each component in your chain and argue on forums about power supplies or cables, buy the Qutest and join Head-Fi. If you want experts to make those decisions for you, buy the Hugo 2 or Hugo 2 TT.

I bought the Qutest because half-the-fun is obsessing over the details.


----------



## uzi2

gearocdguy said:


> It all depends on your use case.
> 
> If you want just a DAC and nothing but the DAC - get the Qutest.
> 
> ...


Darko spouts his words for $$. We give our opinions freely.


----------



## gearocdguy

uzi2 said:


> Darko spouts his words for $$. We give our opinions freely.


We all gotta make a living. I find him this best of the group.


----------



## mvule

Does anyone else have the Qutest and  RME Adi-2 dac (or has heard the latter)?

Looking around the internet...there seems to be a lot of praise for the Adi-2 dac compared to the Qutest but for me there is no contest (talking dac section of Adi-2 only here).

Qutest is so impeccably balanced with tighter bass, more detail and smoother, to my ears at least.


----------



## nxxo

I have a question? Are there streamers that take the qutest in native DSD?


----------



## gearocdguy (Jul 19, 2020)

nxxo said:


> I have a question? Are there streamers that take the qutest in native DSD?


If you want Native 512, I believe you are stuck with Windows. I pretty sure if you wanted to you could run Window's virtually on a PI streamer, but it would be painful to get it all set up and not sure the benefit.


----------



## daredevil_kk

gearocdguy said:


> If you want Native 512, I believe you are stuck with Windows. I pretty sure if you wanted to you could run Window's virtually on a PI streamer, but it would be painful to get it all set up and not sure the benefit.


Or get an Aurender.


----------



## ericpike

Hi all. I run my Qutest with a Bluesound Node 2i over optical, which is noticeably better to my ears than my Chrimecast audio. I mainly use Roon. Are there other streamers that are better sounding than my Node? Thanks!


----------



## Triode User

ericpike said:


> Hi all. I run my Qutest with a Bluesound Node 2i over optical, which is noticeably better to my ears than my Chrimecast audio. I mainly use Roon. Are there other streamers that are better sounding than my Node? Thanks!



I don’t know. Here is my Node 2i sounding great this morning with my Qutest.


----------



## kkrazik2008

Triode User said:


> I don’t know. Here is my Node 2i sounding great this morning with my Qutest.


Love that Musical Fidelity amp, they don’t make them like that anymore. I have the X-150, built like a brick crap house.


----------



## RobertSM

mvule said:


> Does anyone else have the Qutest and  RME Adi-2 dac (or has heard the latter)?
> 
> Looking around the internet...there seems to be a lot of praise for the Adi-2 dac compared to the Qutest but for me there is no contest (talking dac section of Adi-2 only here).
> 
> Qutest is so impeccably balanced with tighter bass, more detail and smoother, to my ears at least.



I absolutely believe the qutest to be have a more refined sound vs. Adi-2. Everything top to bottom in the frequency spectrum on qutest, to me, has a further evolved hi-fi sound.


----------



## Christer (Jul 26, 2020)

kkrazik2008 said:


> Love that Musical Fidelity amp, they don’t make them like that anymore. I have the X-150, built like a brick crap house.


Hmm, I was also a bit surprised to see that Nick is using a Musical Fidelity amp in his second,Qutest based system.
I've never heard that particular one.
Not enough power for my needs.
But I am currently using the Musical Fidelity X-Can V3 with its separate power supply XPSU and the X-LPS for headphone listening via my Qutest/Mscaler and also spinning some vinyl again via headphones with that stack.
Both my Benchmark HPA2 and my other,more recent,MF headphone amp the M1HPA, need a visit to the doctor.
Luckily both digital and analogue sound very nice indeed with my HD800 and HEKV2 with  these MF toys that I had basically retired years ago.
Unlike Nick,I am also using a Musical Fidelity amp in my main, speaker based system.
My Heavy-Weight  MF KW550, amp combo which also comes with its dedicated  PSU,"77lbs" of watts and current, delivering 900 watts  per channel , 0.01% thd between 20-20000khz at full throttle, drives my electrostatic speakers quite nicely.

But also reveals their Achilles heel,which is around 250hz where the electrostatic panels check out and the  conventional bass driver takes over.
But from say 300hz and as high as I can hear, those panels can still pick a fight with almost any other speakers I've auditioned except full range electrostatics from a sheer transparency point of view.
I am quite tempted to buy a Martin Logan XL ART  "nearly full range" electrostatic speaker  even before buying a Dave.
But I doubt Musical Fidelity has got any NEW toys to tempt me. Like most others in HI FI these days they seem more interested in serving the "multi room streaming crowd" since the founder himself retired.
He was a real musician himself and  cared about acoustic music.
His own recording as soloist in Mozart's Clarinet Concerto came with my KW550.
PS Imho Qutest really needs the Mscaler to shine.
Without the Mscaler it sounds a bit harsh and unrefined to me with well recorded acoustical music.
Cheers CC


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> I was also a bit surprised to see that Nick is using a Musical Fidelity amp in his second,Qutest based system.



Correction, it is my third system in the kitchen. That amp never gets turned off and is powering some DIY speakers based on Dali 104 / Living Voice Avatar 2. Mostly it is streaming Radio 3 off the internet.


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Correction, it is my third system in the kitchen. That amp never gets turned off and is powering some DIY speakers based on Dali 104 / Living Voice Avatar 2. Mostly it is streaming Radio 3 off the internet.


Hello Nick,  so what's system number two?
It looks as if that amp and the two toys sitting on top of it need just one gentle nudge from junior standing in that armchair to fall onto the shelf where your TT2 used to live dangerously too?
What are you using to control that streamer?
I see no display,only a tiny blue light indicating it is on.
Is it any good  for other uses more than Radio Three streaming?
I am leaning towards a Streamer solution where I can both easily rip cds and also one that works on its own without any need for an Iphone or Ipad or other extra tool to work more than a handy remote control.
And it will need to sound better, more transparent, than my cd players via optical and preferably also better than hi res via my mbp and usb.
Back on topic of Qutest again.
I am still awaiting your  verdict on power supplies with Qutest and Mscaler?
And have you connected your Qutest to your Mscaler yet?

Imho it can turn, decent enough on its own, little Qutest,almost into a mini Dave.

The difference is easily audible even with BBC Radio Three and other, not quite hi res streaming quality based sources in my systems.
And with real hi res the difference and improvement in SQ is something I would find it very hard to live without.

Cheers CC


----------



## GreenBow

Triode User said:


> Correction, it is my third system in the kitchen. That amp never gets turned off and is powering some DIY speakers based on Dali 104 / Living Voice Avatar 2. Mostly it is streaming Radio 3 off the internet.



When I look at this picture, it makes me think of a statement Rob Watts made. He said all analogue electronics are microphonic.

It suggests to me that the best place for an amplifier is not on the speaker. … I think I would just put it one unit next to the speaker. … When I see stuff like that, I also think 'accident waiting to happen'.

(Another example of this thinking is in the new Naim Supernait 3 that has boards mounted to negate vibrations. To reduce microphonics.)


----------



## Triode User

GreenBow said:


> When I look at this picture, it makes me think of a statement Rob Watts made. He said all analogue electronics are microphonic.
> 
> It suggests to me that the best place for an amplifier is not on the speaker. … I think I would just put it one unit next to the speaker. … When I see stuff like that, I also think 'accident waiting to happen'.
> 
> (Another example of this thinking is in the new Naim Supernait 3 that has boards mounted to negate vibrations. To reduce microphonics.)



Or you might be overthinking it all. Some of the best speakers made are active ones with the amps actually in the cabinets. Anyway, the system sounds great as it is  . . . .

As to an accident waiting to happen, all I can say is that I jump horses over big fixed fences and hedges for a hobby and so I am familiar with risk. That amp has been on top of that speaker for more than 10 years with not so much as a wobble even with dogs and small children around it.


----------



## DecentLevi (Jul 27, 2020)

Christer said:


> I am leaning towards a Streamer solution where I can both easily rip cds and also one that works on its own without any need for an Iphone or Ipad or other extra tool to work more than a handy remote control.
> And it will need to sound better, more transparent, than my cd players via optical and preferably also better than hi res via my mbp and usb.


I wonder if it's even theoretically possible to get better redbook (PCM) quality to a DAC than a good CD transport via optical? Even with the best DDC with reclocker into the DAC, it would be interesting to see if it may possibly get even better than that.


----------



## Christer

DecentLevi said:


> I wonder if it's even theoretically possible to get better redbook (PCM) quality to a DAC than a good CD transport via optical? Even with the best DDC with reclocker into the DAC, it would be interesting to see if it may possibly get even better than that.


You most probably have a very valid  point there.
I have to admit that well recorded cds via optical sound better than I ever imagined they would via my Qutest and Mscaler.
But it would be nice to be able to rip my  now quite large rbcd collection and also the rbcd layer of all my classical  SACDs.
Qutest on its own is  a nice enough little dac. But the Mscaler takes it into a territory where few other dacs can compete except the TT2/HMS and DAVE/HMS imho. 
Cheers CC


----------



## DecentLevi

Yup indeed it's easier to listen off your PC especially if you're a computer guru like me, but sometimes I like to que up a dedicated CD player for that 'last 2%' of sonic purity. I'm pleased to say however that with my current DDC (Audio-GD DI-20 90/98M edition with plenty of burn-in and two USB purifiers going into it) that I'm getting frighteningly close results to a direct CD transport. 

Another plus with the Qutest is that clean DC power from a LPS makes it perform better with all sources, making both PC and direct CD audio sound better being this thing really 'scales' with clean power. Here's the Qutest  PSU thread for any future developments there:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/poll-aftermarket-qutest-psu.935548


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> Hello Nick,  so what's system number two?
> It looks as if that amp and the two toys sitting on top of it need just one gentle nudge from junior standing in that armchair to fall onto the shelf where your TT2 used to live dangerously too?
> What are you using to control that streamer?
> I see no display,only a tiny blue light indicating it is on.
> ...



Hello Christer,

System *One* is Innuos Statement (Roon core and virtual Squeezebox endpoint within Roon), Mscaler (Sean Jacobs DC4 power supply), Dave (Sean Jacobs DC4 power supply), Pass Labs XA60.8, Spendor SP200 speakers.
System *Two* is Auralic Aries as a Roon endpoint, Dave (Sean Jacobs DC4 power supply), ATC SCM150ASL active speakers.
System *Three* is Node 2i as a Roon endpoint (with DIY power supply), Qutest (SBooster power supply), old Musical Fidelity X-A2 amp, DIY speakers.

The Node 2i is used as a Roon endpoint which is controlled on the ipad or iphone (or indeed with my daughter's phone if she is visiting so she can dial up her preferred music). If we are not listening to Radio Three in the kitchen via Roon to the 2i then we listen to the ripped music stored on the Innuos and played through the 2i to the Qutest.

Out of interest the Node 2i is connected to the Qutest via optical but the Innuos is connected to the Mscaler via USB which sounds at least as good as optical.

On the power supplies front, a friend and I recently compared about five of them with the Qutest. The best was using the 5v output from the Sean Jacobs DC4 Dave power supply but this is stupid money to use with the Qutest and was therefore disqualified from contention. After that we both preferred the SBooster with Ultra MkII upgrade but nipping at its heals was a DIY supply that I normally use with the Node 2i. Compared to these all the others (to remain nameless) had a slightly abrasive or forward quality to the treble and not quite as good bass.


----------



## Arniesb

Triode User said:


> Hello Christer,
> 
> System *One* is Innuos Statement (Roon core and virtual Squeezebox endpoint within Roon), Mscaler (Sean Jacobs DC4 power supply), Dave (Sean Jacobs DC4 power supply), Pass Labs XA60.8, Spendor SP200 speakers.
> System *Two* is Auralic Aries as a Roon endpoint, Dave (Sean Jacobs DC4 power supply), ATC SCM150ASL active speakers.
> ...


Very impressive setup man. I imagine listening music on that would feel just as good being on the concert...
Movies should sound very immersive too right?


----------



## Triode User

Arniesb said:


> Very impressive setup man. I imagine listening music on that would feel just as good being on the concert...
> Movies should sound very immersive too right?



Thanks, nothing ever really replaces live music but it is very satisfying.


----------



## nxxo

Do you know if it is possible to run a Qutest on a Wyred4Sound PS-1 with the STD card...I think it gives a maximum of 1.2A. I know Chord uses a 2A XFO, but seriously, does he really need that much? I was wondering if he had any with this LPSU  here. 





thank you


----------



## Justamusiclover

Hello everyone, I'm sorry for posting another discussion about the power supply to the QUTEST but I'm really struggling here and reading trough the discussion didn't provide a definitive answer.

I 'm looking to upgrade my DAC (Audiolab M-DAC) and I bought for an audition a QUTEST and a Matrix Audio X-Sabre pro MQA.
Is worth to mention that 99% of the music I hear is trough Tidal and I was sorry to lose the MQA capabilities of the platform so I really wanted to like the Matrix better.

After a very long audition I concluded that the Qutest provide a nicer, deeper and more musical sound regardless of the file being MQA or FLAC. I actually blind tested my wife to confirm this and she was 100% accurate.

Here comes my problem. With my current setup (listed below) I have a black background with no humming trough the speakers; as soon as I connect the QUTEST the system start humming (increasing as I raise the volume) regardless of the selected input on the QUTEST or on the Supernait. Powering the QUTEST with a power bank eliminates the humming completely!

Both the M-DAC and the Matrix provide a black background and no humming when plugged in the same setup therefore I assume this is a problem with the PS of the Qutest.

I would really like to keep the QUTEST but I really don't want to use a power bank which need to be plugged and unplugged all the time and if I include this humming in my overall valuation then I favour the Matrix.

Can you please suggest me a solution to my problem which doesn't include using a power bank perpetually.

(PS Dectec - Aries Mini - AQ Coffee USB  - QUTEST/MATRIX - TQ Ultrablack RCA - Naim Supernait 3 - TQ Black II - PMC twenty5 21i)


----------



## miketlse

Justamusiclover said:


> Hello everyone, I'm sorry for posting another discussion about the power supply to the QUTEST but I'm really struggling here and reading trough the discussion didn't provide a definitive answer.
> 
> I 'm looking to upgrade my DAC (Audiolab M-DAC) and I bought for an audition a QUTEST and a Matrix Audio X-Sabre pro MQA.
> Is worth to mention that 99% of the music I hear is trough Tidal and I was sorry to lose the MQA capabilities of the platform so I really wanted to like the Matrix better.
> ...


@Rob Watts is probably the best person to answer this question.


----------



## Rob Watts

Justamusiclover said:


> Hello everyone, I'm sorry for posting another discussion about the power supply to the QUTEST but I'm really struggling here and reading trough the discussion didn't provide a definitive answer.
> 
> I 'm looking to upgrade my DAC (Audiolab M-DAC) and I bought for an audition a QUTEST and a Matrix Audio X-Sabre pro MQA.
> Is worth to mention that 99% of the music I hear is trough Tidal and I was sorry to lose the MQA capabilities of the platform so I really wanted to like the Matrix better.
> ...



It's the leakage current from the PSU creating issues with the amp - that's why a battery elimates it as it has no leakage current from the mains. Simply earth Qutest and it will go away. You can earth the BNC inputs, RCA outputs, or use an earthed USB PSU. Or you could unscrew one of the chassis bolts and wrap a wire onto it and re-screw. Alternatively, earth your amp.


----------



## Jon L

Rob Watts said:


> It's the leakage current from the PSU creating issues with the amp - that's why a battery elimates it as it has no leakage current from the mains. Simply earth Qutest and it will go away. You can earth the BNC inputs, RCA outputs, or use an earthed USB PSU. Or you could unscrew one of the chassis bolts and wrap a wire onto it and re-screw. Alternatively, earth your amp.



Yup, SMPS leakage current issue is not talked about enough.  In fact, iFi iPower SMPS displays large amount of leakage current when measured, which is not mentioned in specs since iFi measures iPower with sophisticated isolation transformers in place to get rid of this aspect (iFi confirms this themselves).  

My speaker system uses 107 dB sensitive horns, so any noise is greatly magnified.  I made a DIY system ground "station" by simply wiring up a cheap AC plug with only a couple of ground wire connected, which I connect to various combinations of components depending on where leakage current, noise, ground-loop, hum comes from.




SystemGround by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## ecwl

Justamusiclover said:


> Can you please suggest me a solution to my problem which doesn't include using a power bank perpetually.


because I’m not very handy, and I’ve had grounding issues with other products in the past, i asked my audio dealer who is handy to make me ground wiring. But I've heard of others whose audio dealers aren’t into making these ground wires, So I have found that others would recommend ifi groundhog+
https://ifi-audio.com/products/groundhog/
on one hand, it’s pricey for what you get but it saves the hassle of finding somebody to make the ground wire and connection for you.


----------



## Justamusiclover

ecwl said:


> because I’m not very handy, and I’ve had grounding issues with other products in the past, i asked my audio dealer who is handy to make me ground wiring. But I've heard of others whose audio dealers aren’t into making these ground wires, So I have found that others would recommend ifi groundhog+
> https://ifi-audio.com/products/groundhog/
> on one hand, it’s pricey for what you get but it saves the hassle of finding somebody to make the ground wire and connection for you.


Thank to everyone on the forum for being so helpful. That’s great!!


----------



## iFi audio

ecwl said:


> on one hand, it’s pricey for what you get but it saves the hassle of finding somebody to make the ground wire and connection for you.



That's what it does indeed, and is built to last


----------



## boxerlc

mvule said:


> Does anyone else have the Qutest and  RME Adi-2 dac (or has heard the latter)?
> 
> Looking around the internet...there seems to be a lot of praise for the Adi-2 dac compared to the Qutest but for me there is no contest (talking dac section of Adi-2 only here).
> 
> Qutest is so impeccably balanced with tighter bass, more detail and smoother, to my ears at least.


I bought ADI2 DAC before buying the Qutest, ADI2 DAC sounds so dull even compared with the 2Qute I had at that time. I think Qutest is no doubt the better DAC.


----------



## jwbrent

boxerlc said:


> I bought ADI2 DAC before buying the Qutest, ADI2 DAC sounds so dull even compared with the 2Qute I had at that time. I think Qutest is no doubt the better DAC.



Nicer build, too. Plus, I’m still hoping for a scaler in the same form factor as the Qutest.


----------



## nxxo

The only mistake in my opinion from Chord  to be the best DAC price/performance ratio is an XLR output. If they had put that in, I believe the sale of the CAD would have been x3


----------



## Justamusiclover

My problem with the humming has been resolved. 
i received the ifi groundhog+ and as suggested by Rob Watts I earthed the amp Humming is gone!


----------



## nxxo

Justamusiclover said:


> My problem with the humming has been resolved.
> i received the ifi groundhog+ and as suggested by Rob Watts I earthed the amp Humming is gone!


do you have a pics of your setup ?


----------



## Triode User

nxxo said:


> The only mistake in my opinion from Chord  to be the best DAC price/performance ratio is an XLR output. If they had put that in, I believe the sale of the CAD would have been x3



The inclusion of XLR is not just a matter of extra sockets (and space required for them) but also extra circuitry is required to generate the balanced signal. This would add to the cost of the Qutest, probably by more than you might anticipate and this could take the selling price to an area outside of the Chord target market.


----------



## iFi audio

Justamusiclover said:


> My problem with the humming has been resolved.
> i received the ifi groundhog+ and as suggested by Rob Watts I earthed the amp Humming is gone!


It's great to hear that Groundhog sorted your humming issue, thanks!


----------



## Stourmead

Happy to say I’ve FINALLY settled on my home working / study headphone setup, and welcomed the Qutest to the setup.

it’s fed by the popular 5v ifi Power supply.

it’s connected to my Laptop over USB for when I’m listening to YouTube etc (via random unbranded USB cable I had lying about)

for actual music it’s connected via BNC coaxial to a Raspberry Pi 3b+ with Allo Digione Signature HAT, and that’s all powered by the Shanti PSU.
Qutest feeds into a Schiit Magni 3+ headphone amp (set to high gain) 
Interconnects here all round are from the  Shawline range.

headphones are Dan Clarke Audio, using Forza Audioworks Noir Hybrid HPC cable

Remarkably this is the first time I’ve ever actually found any use to the filter button and have found green to be my new favourite . 
When the Qutest was in the main rig downstairs fed by optical from my CD player , or from the same streamer , the filters never seemed to do anything. I think this is more a reflection on my amp, a Yamaha A-S501 which is soon going to be upgraded.

Really looking forward to spending many hours each day with this new setup 

on a side note the Hugo2go combi is now in the main rig as a one piece streamer/dac solution I can just grab and walk out the door with, which I’m happy with.


----------



## Zzt231gr

Stourmead said:


> Happy to say I’ve FINALLY settled on my home working / study headphone setup, and welcomed the Qutest to the setup.
> 
> it’s fed by the popular 5v ifi Power supply.
> 
> ...


Have you compared ifi to the sound of the stock psu carefully?You may be surprised...


----------



## Stourmead

Zzt231gr said:


> Have you compared ifi to the sound of the stock psu carefully?You may be surprised...


That’s next - I have the Allo Shanti LPS 5v 3a feed to compare to as well , giving me three power options in total


----------



## Zzt231gr

That's the spirit!

We also have a dedicated thread for PSU talk!


----------



## Stourmead

Ok game over just switched the supply to the shanti ! 🙌🏻


----------



## iFi audio

Stourmead said:


> Happy to say I’ve FINALLY settled on my home working / study headphone setup, and welcomed the Qutest to the setup.
> 
> it’s fed by the popular 5v ifi Power supply.
> 
> ...



That's a very cool setup and your headphone cable looks familiar 

Enjoy!


----------



## GreenBow

Stourmead said:


> Happy to say I’ve FINALLY settled on my home working / study headphone setup, and welcomed the Qutest to the setup.
> 
> it’s fed by the popular 5v ifi Power supply.
> 
> ...



Yeah Qutest is an awesome DAC.

I have a Qutest and luckily a TT2 sat very close to each other. I use Qutest for PC work, while TT2 mostly for music. … However I sometimes don't bother turning the TT2 on and just use Qutest since it's already on. I don't feel any remorse for not using the TT2 even when playing music.


----------



## The Jester

Probably the input via 384khz USB or Coax will be more revealing of the effects or the filters compared to toslink‘s 96khz 
Nice setup ...


----------



## jwbrent

GreenBow said:


> Yeah Qutest is an awesome DAC.
> 
> I have a Qutest and luckily a TT2 sat very close to each other. I use Qutest for PC work, while TT2 mostly for music. … However I sometimes don't bother turning the TT2 on and just use Qutest since it's already on. I don't feel any remorse for not using the TT2 even when playing music.



That’s quite a testament! 

I’m satisfied with mine and all I’m hoping for from Chord now is a matching streamer/scaler ... and a Mojo 2. 😁


----------



## Triode User

Here is a just published review of the Qutest where it sees off much more expensive competition.

*REVIEW*


----------



## nxxo

Nice review


----------



## Triode User

nxxo said:


> Nice review



 and the guy likes Pass Labs as well.. . . . . . 🙂


----------



## nxxo

Triode User said:


> and the guy likes Pass Labs as well.. . . . . . 🙂



My Qutest with my HPA-1 is just top


----------



## George 47

I can only agree.


----------



## MWeston

Hey all,

I've had a major disappointment tonight.  I'm using the Qutest through a S.M.S.L. SP200 amp and then into my Sony MDR-Z1R's.  They are pretty sensitive and at the end of a song, I noticed a little bit of static when nothing was playing.  I cranked the amp full (with no music playing) and the noise was terrible plus it was making lots of morse code-like sounds at me; just bleeping and blooping away at me.

I disconnected the USB from the computer...no change.  (not a USB issue)
I disconnected the RCA jacks from the Qutest but left the 1m lengths hanging out of the amp...noise all gone.  (not an RCA noise coupling issue based on wire length)
I use surge protection/battery backup (pure sine output) so I moved the power adapter straight to the wall...noisy.

So this noise is being generated internally to the Qutest and the remaining noise input is the power supply adapter.  Are other people seeing this?  If so, did you find a way to solve it?  This thing is way too expensive to sound like an old AM radio between songs, not cool at all!

Is the solution for me to run a ground wire from the chassis of the Qutest to the earth ground of my home?  I don't even think this old place is even providing earth grounding in the outlet box.


Thanks!


----------



## dac64 (Aug 25, 2020)

MWeston said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I've had a major disappointment tonight.  I'm using the Qutest through a S.M.S.L. SP200 amp and then into my Sony MDR-Z1R's.  They are pretty sensitive and at the end of a song, I noticed a little bit of static when nothing was playing.  I cranked the amp full (with no music playing) and the noise was terrible plus it was making lots of morse code-like sounds at me; just bleeping and blooping away at me.
> 
> ...



test with a powerbank to isolate noises caused by the stock power supply or qutest itself.

you said:
" I disconnected the RCA jacks from the Qutest but left the 1m lengths hanging out of the amp...noise all gone. (not an RCA noise coupling issue based on wire length) "

noises generated from both channels? if yes, try other RCA cables. or test the RCA with other dac


----------



## nxxo

maybe a ground loop


----------



## MWeston (Aug 25, 2020)

It sure does have the signs of a ground loop.  I'll see if my other DAC does this because it has a similar power setup (power brick, no USB power).  Testing with a battery pack might be a good way to see if it goes away, but it's definitely not the solution to my problem.  This is a purely desktop setup so I must solve this in a more permanent way. 

Edit: My other DAC does the same thing.  The loop is happening when the signals get into the amp which has an internal switching supply and, likely, isolated ground from the mains.  I guess this is the argument for an all balanced system!


----------



## snatex

I am running Mac Mini > Lifatec glass optical > Chord Qutest

When using Qobuz it plays fine at 24/96 but if I switch to the 24/192 setting I just get a faint static. My understanding is the Qutest is capable of 192khz using the optical input. Is there a Mac or Qutest setting or something else I am missing?


----------



## ra990

MWeston said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I've had a major disappointment tonight.  I'm using the Qutest through a S.M.S.L. SP200 amp and then into my Sony MDR-Z1R's.  They are pretty sensitive and at the end of a song, I noticed a little bit of static when nothing was playing.  I cranked the amp full (with no music playing) and the noise was terrible plus it was making lots of morse code-like sounds at me; just bleeping and blooping away at me.
> 
> ...


As others have mentioned, test with a USB battery pack that outputs 5v 2amp (most USB power banks). It sounds like the noise is coming through the AC adapter since nothing else is connected. How long are your RCA cables? Single ended cables are prone to noise, so you should keep them as short as possible, under 1 meter, if possible. Also, try to make sure the RCA cables aren't too close/touching a bunch of digital cables, they might pick up noise that way too.


----------



## Hooster

MWeston said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I've had a major disappointment tonight.  I'm using the Qutest through a S.M.S.L. SP200 amp and then into my Sony MDR-Z1R's.  They are pretty sensitive and at the end of a song, I noticed a little bit of static when nothing was playing.  I cranked the amp full (with no music playing) and the noise was terrible plus it was making lots of morse code-like sounds at me; just bleeping and blooping away at me.



Just a tip. The Qutest and your headphones are a class above the S.M.S.L. I suspect you have  a lot to gain by upgrading that headphone amplifier.


----------



## Justamusiclover

I think you are experiencing a grounding problem. I resolved buying a ifi groundhog but more capable people simply build a purposed cable.



Rob Watts said:


> It's the leakage current from the PSU creating issues with the amp - that's why a battery elimates it as it has no leakage current from the mains. Simply earth Qutest and it will go away. You can earth the BNC inputs, RCA outputs, or use an earthed USB PSU. Or you could unscrew one of the chassis bolts and wrap a wire onto it and re-screw. Alternatively, earth your amp.


----------



## DesignTaylor

A Qutest has recently come into my life and I'm really digging it, sounds fantastic.

I have one issue I'm trying to sort out. I have two primary amps on my desk that I like to alternate between. With my past DACs I've been able to use the XLR outs for my balanced SS amp and the RCA outs for my SE tube amp. But, with the Qutest I only get one set of analog outputs so I'm trying to figure out a simple way, that won't degrade the sound, to get the signal to both amps. I'd like to keep the signal path as clean as possible to preserve all the subtlety the Qutest has to offer. 

Anyone else had to solve for this? Ideas?


----------



## Victorr

snatex said:


> When using Qobuz it plays fine at 24/96 but if I switch to the 24/192 setting I just get a faint static. My understanding is the Qutest is capable of 192khz using the optical input. Is there a Mac or Qutest setting or something else I am missing?


Try a different optical cable, even the cheapest one. If it plays, then your cable is not suitable for such a high flow.


----------



## iFi audio

Justamusiclover said:


> I think you are experiencing a grounding problem. I resolved buying a ifi groundhog



Yup, Groundhog was designed to provide ground and am happy that it did the job for you


----------



## dac64

DesignTaylor said:


> I have two primary amps on my desk that I like to alternate between.
> 
> I'm trying to figure out a simple way, that won't degrade the sound, to get the signal to both amps.



Y-Split


----------



## MWeston (Aug 25, 2020)

Hooster said:


> Just a tip. The Qutest and your headphones are a class above the S.M.S.L. I suspect you have  a lot to gain by upgrading that headphone amplifier.


Haha, yes I knew a comment like this might come up.   The SP200 does a decent job but I am working on a new amp for my headphones. It's on the roadmap for sure! I'd like something with a touch warmer sound. The A90 looks nice but we'll see. That amp will have the same ground loop issues from what I've read so I have to solve this issue first.


----------



## ra990

MWeston said:


> Haha, yes I knew a comment like this might come up.   The SP200 does a decent job but I am working on a new amp for my headphones. It's on the roadmap for sure! I'd like something with a touch warmer sound. The A90 looks nice but we'll see. That amp will have the same ground loop issues from what I've read so I have to solve this issue first.


The SP200 is actually a cool pairing with the Qutest. It's a similar size, easily stackable, very quiet, powerful, and it's a single ended amp for a single ended source. I use it on my bedside setup at times.


----------



## Hooster

MWeston said:


> Haha, yes I knew a comment like this might come up.   The SP200 does a decent job but I am working on a new amp for my headphones. It's on the roadmap for sure! I'd like something with a touch warmer sound. The A90 looks nice but we'll see. That amp will have the same ground loop issues from what I've read so I have to solve this issue first.



Something from Violectric or SPL might be worth considering too. The best of luck.


----------



## DecentLevi

MWeston said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I've had a major disappointment tonight.  I'm using the Qutest through a S.M.S.L. SP200 amp and then into my Sony MDR-Z1R's.  They are pretty sensitive and at the end of a song, I noticed a little bit of static when nothing was playing.  I cranked the amp full (with no music playing) and the noise was terrible plus it was making lots of morse code-like sounds at me; just bleeping and blooping away at me.
> 
> ...


I would say the sound you describe would unmistakably be either from a cell phone or Wi-Fi router; probably the former; both of which are very detrimental to the audiophile hobby that people spend a lot of money getting rid of such RF or HF interference. Try turning off one or both and see it that solves the problem. If so, consider further moving away either cell phone or Wi-Fi router, or getting shorter or better shielded RCA cables would be my advice.


----------



## Triode User

DecentLevi said:


> I would say the sound you describe would unmistakably be either from a cell phone or Wi-Fi router; probably the former; both of which are very detrimental to the audiophile hobby that people spend a lot of money getting rid of such RF or HF interference. Try turning off one or both and see it that solves the problem. If so, consider further moving away either cell phone or Wi-Fi router, or getting shorter or better shielded RCA cables would be my advice.



Agreed and that would be my first thought of what is causing the noise. I have also had a 'wifi power thingy repeater that plugs in the mains to send the signal' make the same noise through a DAC placed too close. @MWeston I would suggest looking at all your wiring routing and any nearby Router, DECT phone, wifi repeater etc.


----------



## DecentLevi (Aug 26, 2020)

So then, in thinking about how much of a difference clean DC power from an LPS makes to the Qutest, it's had me wondering how the chosen digital input may be coloring the sound (in my case BNC coax cable from my DI-20 audio interface AKA DDC). Is there any merit to the notion that a BNC connection may introduce any impurities in the signal to the Qutest? Granted it's not carrying a power signal in the same way as DC power but it's got to be carrying some sort of current or voltage.

If so, would anyone recommend a sort of isolator or galvanic device for digital coax connections that would further improve things? And what product might that be? I've already looked at the iFi Groundhog, but that seems to serve a different purpose. I'm getting fantastic sound nevertheless, but just curious about possible tweaks.


----------



## blueninjasix

Victorr said:


> Try a different optical cable, even the cheapest one. If it plays, then your cable is not suitable for such a high flow.


And my understanding is that Chord have changed their blurb to now say the limit for optical is 96khz and not 192khz as previously stated even in the Qutest manual.


----------



## Flognuts

How does this compare to the mojo as a desktop dac?
I am seriously impressed with the mojo's dac so wondering how different this sounds


----------



## nxxo

MWeston said:


> It sure does have the signs of a ground loop.  I'll see if my other DAC does this because it has a similar power setup (power brick, no USB power).  Testing with a battery pack might be a good way to see if it goes away, but it's definitely not the solution to my problem.  This is a purely desktop setup so I must solve this in a more permanent way.
> 
> Edit: My other DAC does the same thing.  The loop is happening when the signals get into the amp which has an internal switching supply and, likely, isolated ground from the mains.  I guess this is the argument for an all balanced system!



Looking at ifi ground hog is not very expensive and it might be a good idea in your situation.


----------



## DecentLevi

I'm using a medium quality BNC cable with from my DDC to the Qutest, the Belden 1694A from BlueJeans cable for $25, and will soon be getting an industry-leading one from Wave High Fidelity - will chime in on any differences.


----------



## uzi2 (Aug 27, 2020)

Although this was in answer to the use of BNC cables with M Scaler, Rob Watts comments are very interesting. I was surprised that a longer cable (2M) would produce better sound than a shorter one, but ferrites appear to be the way to go and are included with the Wave cables.


----------



## snatex

Victorr said:


> Try a different optical cable, even the cheapest one. If it plays, then your cable is not suitable for such a high flow.



I tried a cheaper Fospower cable today and that didn't work either. Instead of the faint static I got from the Lifatec, the Fospower played nothing. 

I confirmed my Mac Mini 2014 plays 192khz and my Audio Midi settings were correct. 

I noticed that the light in the middle of the Qutest that turns green when playing 96hz flashes red when I switch to 192khz. Does that flashing red light indicate anything?


----------



## uzi2 (Aug 27, 2020)

I regularly swap the Qutest from desktop to main system. I have just built a new PC around a Gigabyte Aorus Elite AC motherboard and USB to Qutest is really clean. I think the modern motherboard designs are doing really well to reduce noise to audio systems. I am running HQplayer, so 705/768k to Qutest. The desktop system uses the stock power supply with no issues. The main system is fed via RPi4 NAA and both Pi and Qutest are powered by Shanti. I am more persuaded that it is the Pi that needs the linear power supply more than the Qutest
Edit : I should add that I am using a Corsair RW750x power supply for the computer


----------



## Victorr (Aug 27, 2020)

snatex said:


> I tried a cheaper Fospower cable today and that didn't work either. Instead of the faint static I got from the Lifatec, the Fospower played nothing.
> 
> I confirmed my Mac Mini 2014 plays 192khz and my Audio Midi settings were correct.
> 
> I noticed that the light in the middle of the Qutest that turns green when playing 96hz flashes red when I switch to 192khz. Does that flashing red light indicate anything?


A flashing red light probably means the DAC cannot recognize the stream.
Earlier, Toshiba produced optical transmitters. These transmitters are guaranteed to support 192 kHz. Now, when these interfaces are manufactured in China, there is no guarantee that your device will have a stable output of a stream with a sampling frequency of 192 KHz. For this reason, almost all manufacturers do not declare support for 192 KHz when using S/PDIF optical interfaces.


----------



## Jon L

uzi2 said:


> both Pi and Qutest are powered by Shanti. I am more persuaded that it is the Pi that needs the linear power supply more than the Qutest


There's quite a bit of truth in that. 
I posted my PS comparison on Qutest including Shanti, stock smps, and Bakoon Li battery supply here:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/poll-aftermarket-qutest-psu.935548/page-6


----------



## miketlse

snatex said:


> I am running Mac Mini > Lifatec glass optical > Chord Qutest
> 
> When using Qobuz it plays fine at 24/96 but if I switch to the 24/192 setting I just get a faint static. My understanding is the Qutest is capable of 192khz using the optical input. Is there a Mac or Qutest setting or something else I am missing?


Extracted from a PM with Matt a year ago.
" All our DACs are capable of 24/192KHz over optical. However the spec and design of spdif optical means at this rate it is right on the edge of working. This means you need to keep the optical cable as short as possible, use glass fibre if possible and then the fibre in the plugs has to be perfectly aligned so that there is no mismatch when plugged into the receiver in the DAC. So there are lots of factors that can cause optical to fail at 24/192KHz.

Added to this around 2 years ago Sony in particular (but also the optical component manufacturers) announced that they would stop support of 24/192KHz via optical and there was a recommendation that the spec was reduced to 24/96KHz for all consumer products to help reduce the confusion and the number of customer support cases.
This means that Chord had no guarantee that the source would actually work correctly at 24/192KHz, whether the optical cable was capable of passing the signal up to 24/192KHz, and then finally on top of that any cable mismatch issue would also cause problems.

So Chord have decided to simplify things and start to change the spec of all our products to only guarantee operation at 24/96KHz, to avoid any confusion or upset when higher rates do not work correctly. So yes there is a difference between 'ratified' which means we can guarantee operation and 'technically capable of' where it can do it if the correct conditions are met."


----------



## HumanMedia

DecentLevi said:


> I'm using a medium quality BNC cable with from my DDC to the Qutest, the Belden 1694A from BlueJeans cable for $25, and will soon be getting an industry-leading one from Wave High Fidelity - will chime in on any differences.



Now you are going to have to get a Chord M Scaler to accessorise with that Wave cable!


----------



## Reactcore

Ok on a sidetrack.
I was just openly noob wondering. The HMS 'predicts' the original waveform shape between the samples while upscaling. And this is 'live' processed every time again while playing needing a powerful CPU.

Can't this be digitally recorded.. or processed just once to create a new 768khz file to store and played? Qutest USB takes the sample rate needed. I'm aware the music files would become of much bigger size. 
This would be for the ones with smaller wallets😁

A PC won't even need to be that powerful while not live playing.. it just takes more time to generate the files.

Ofcourse the same algorytm as in the HMS should be used, not just linear doubling of samples which wouldnt add any details.

It would mean a software application made by Chord that actually remasters 44.1 files.

Well i'm just stargazing lol.


----------



## uzi2

Reactcore said:


> Ok on a sidetrack.
> I was just openly noob wondering. The HMS 'predicts' the original waveform shape between the samples while upscaling. And this is 'live' processed every time again while playing needing a powerful CPU.
> 
> Can't this be digitally recorded.. or processed just once to create a new 768khz file to store and played? Qutest USB takes the sample rate needed. I'm aware the music files would become of much bigger size.
> ...


This can be done with HQPlayer 4 Pro, but a big wallet is required


----------



## ra990

Reactcore said:


> Ok on a sidetrack.
> I was just openly noob wondering. The HMS 'predicts' the original waveform shape between the samples while upscaling. And this is 'live' processed every time again while playing needing a powerful CPU.
> 
> Can't this be digitally recorded.. or processed just once to create a new 768khz file to store and played? Qutest USB takes the sample rate needed. I'm aware the music files would become of much bigger size.
> ...


Yes, the digital output of the HMS can technically be encoded into a file at the upsampled rate. Chord could actually provide some upsampled files for users to test the difference on their systems before purchasing a HMS.


----------



## Reactcore

Like offering this on their site.. just pay, upload your file and download after processing.. many companies make money this way. But i guess copyrights and stuff is involved


----------



## DecentLevi

I thought some of you may be interested in my findings with the potential of ferrite beads on the Qutest stock cable, and especially on other parts of a hi-fi system. Quoted from the Qutest aftermarket PSU thread:



DecentLevi said:


> BREAKTHROUGH ALERT
> 
> Introducing the ferrite bead improvement! These are nothing new, but new to me and I have found a few good uses for it, always making a positive difference and in slightly different ways on different components. So I have these 8 beads sitting around I got for like $6 five years ago to quell buzzing sound on an external anode wire for tubes. The incoming BNC cable from Wave High Fidelity that uses ferrite beads / chokes got me to thinking how these may be of use elsewhere.
> 
> ...


----------



## huangwan

Hi reading through well, skimming through this tread has me thinking about adding a M Scaler to my Qutest. While contemplating and poking around on the web I found this new to me Denafrips, Isis and Gaia. These are D to D converters not upscalers. What caught my eye was " The Gaia transforms the Qutest.  I had to keep checking myself since the Gaia arrived to make sure I was hearing the magnitude of change I believed I was hearing.  Yep, it is real.  I could see the Qutest+Gaia combo as an "end game" combo for the vast majority of audiophiles."  Does anyone have experience with these converters


----------



## George 47

And a great review of the M Scalar and Wave Reference Storm Cables : https://www.hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/145250-chord-m-scalar-and-wave-storm-reference-cables/

I think he liked them.


----------



## HumanMedia

huangwan said:


> Hi reading through well, skimming through this tread has me thinking about adding a M Scaler to my Qutest. While contemplating and poking around on the web I found this new to me Denafrips, Isis and Gaia. These are D to D converters not upscalers. What caught my eye was " The Gaia transforms the Qutest.  I had to keep checking myself since the Gaia arrived to make sure I was hearing the magnitude of change I believed I was hearing.  Yep, it is real.  I could see the Qutest+Gaia combo as an "end game" combo for the vast majority of audiophiles."  Does anyone have experience with these converters



Trying to figure out what a Gaia does?
If you don't actually need to convert from one format to another is it just a noise filter?
I guess if you are using a computer as a source it could have quite a dramatic effect. Another way to achieve that is by moving the playback function of the computer to a low cost low noise streamer. I get the feeling I am missing something important here.


----------



## huangwan

HumanMedia said:


> Trying to figure out what a Gaia does?
> If you don't actually need to convert from one format to another is it just a noise filter?
> I guess if you are using a computer as a source it could have quite a dramatic effect. Another way to achieve that is by moving the playback function of the computer to a low cost low noise streamer. I get the feeling I am missing something important here.


I’m with you. I’m trying to understand how a DDC could give such a radical perception.


----------



## technobear

The Gaia is a bit like an iGalvanic3.0 + iUSB3.0 but taken to a much higher level and also catering for SPDIF inputs and outputs (and laboratory atomic clocks if you have any). I dare say it will have a noticeable effect on any DAC. Even the humble iPurifier3 gets a cleaner better separated sound out of most USB DACs including Hugo2 (so probably applies to Qutest also). It would be interesting to know if Gaia does anything at all when using optical to a Chord DAC given the level of jitter immunity of the pulse array DAC.

Has anyone here tried an iFi Audio SPDIF iPurifier on optical to a Chord DAC?

Gaia does not do what M-Scaler does so you still need an M-Scaler.


----------



## huangwan

technobear said:


> The Gaia is a bit like an iGalvanic3.0 + iUSB3.0 but taken to a much higher level and also catering for SPDIF inputs and outputs (and laboratory atomic clocks if you have any). I dare say it will have a noticeable effect on any DAC. Even the humble iPurifier3 gets a cleaner better separated sound out of most USB DACs including Hugo2 (so probably applies to Qutest also). It would be interesting to know if Gaia does anything at all when using optical to a Chord DAC given the level of jitter immunity of the pulse array DAC.
> 
> Has anyone here tried an iFi Audio SPDIF iPurifier on optical to a Chord DAC?
> 
> Gaia does not do what M-Scaler does so you still need an M-Scaler.


Technobear, my ears and wallet thank you!


----------



## iFi audio (Sep 17, 2020)

huangwan said:


> Technobear, my ears and wallet thank you!



He wears a pointy hat and robe, has a beard and staff. He's as old as audio itself. He's been places and seen things. Now he's here with us, so let's all learn from his wisdom. Just saying .


----------



## technobear (Sep 18, 2020)

iFi audio said:


> He wears a pointy hat and robe, has a beard and staff. He's as old as audio itself. He's been places and seen things. Now he's here with us, so let's all learn from his wisdom. Just saying .



Usually a baseball cap or a beanie depending on temperature. As for a robe, does a dressing gown count?

I do have a beard! I can't afford staff though (not after paying for Hugo 2)


----------



## iFi audio

technobear said:


> As for a robe, does a dressing gown count?



Yeah, that's fine 



technobear said:


> I can't afford staff though (not after paying for Hugo 2)



Fair enough, Hugo 2 is far more useful


----------



## miketlse (Sep 18, 2020)

technobear said:


> As for a robe, does a dressing gown count?


Yes if you feel comfortable enough in it, then fully enjoy the music.


----------



## Reactcore

So ive made a short 1.5m cable to connect my Senn's straight to Qutest RCA's squeezing just a bit more details out😆 i used mps cinch and acrolink brand plugs on a original HD600 cable. 300ohm phones are a perfect match with Qutest internal 'Mojo' out stage.


----------



## uzi2 (Sep 20, 2020)

Nice looking cable


----------



## iFi audio

uzi2 said:


> Nice looking cable



A bit odd seeing HD800's connectors in such a cable, isn't it  ?


----------



## Reactcore

Its a fine conductor though.. no need to be double isolated.. and the shorter.. the less signal degradation


----------



## Jon L

Reactcore said:


> So ive made a short 1.5m cable to connect my Senn's straight to Qutest RCA's squeezing just a bit more details out😆 i used mps cinch and acrolink brand plugs on a original HD600 cable. 300ohm phones are a perfect match with Qutest internal 'Mojo' out stage.



You are using the buffer caps on Qutest RCA output to get this result, right?


----------



## Reactcore

It works without them too but a headphone draws more current then a amp. And its the end stage that needs to deliver the power. So i installed the caps right on 8v lines to it surpassing the internal voltage regulators. (And the PSU) The result is really noticable specially in higher volumes. A TT also has them inside


----------



## Hooster (Oct 12, 2020)

technobear said:


> Gaia does not do what M-Scaler does so you still need an M-Scaler.



Heaves a sigh of relief. It would have been a crying shame if one no longer needed an M-Scaler!

I would be surprised if all these components did not see huge benefits from improved power supplies and power chords, so now there is an excuse to triple down on all that, and all these boxes need to be connected together with some super cables, yipeee!


----------



## Hooster (Oct 12, 2020)

Double message.


----------



## HumanMedia (Oct 12, 2020)

My opinion is that if you just spend the money on a good quality low noise source you don’t need all of those expensive boxes and cables and regenerators and converters and additional power supplies just for the additional regeneraters and filters etc. Fix the source then the component centipede between your source and DAC is not needed.

And you don’t have to spend that much, if you are a little bit technical then a low cost NUC as a source/streamer is a quantum leap better than a generic Desktop or laptop PC, and cheaper than the before mentioned standards converter which is being suggested not for its function to convert between digital formats but because of its coincidental filtering of noise from the source...


----------



## marcus2704

I have a Sennheiser HDV820 Amp/DAC which powers HD800S headphones.  

I use a Fiio M11 Pro as my source, into the USB-B port of the HDV820.  

Could I incorporate a Qutest into my setup?  After a conversation with a sales rep I am seeking clarification that it can be used in my setup at all, and if it is likely to improve anything, as he felt it unlikely.

If it could be described to me how this would be cabled up it would go some way to clearing the picture up for me.

Any replies appreciated!


----------



## Victorr (Oct 14, 2020)

marcus2704 said:


> If it could be described to me how this would be cabled up it would go some way to clearing the picture up for me


Fiio M11 Pro -> (coaxial or USB) to DAC Qutest -> analog input (unbal.) HDV820 -> HP  HD800S



marcus2704 said:


> After a conversation with a sales rep I am seeking clarification that it can be used in my setup at all, and if it is likely to improve anything, as he felt it unlikely.


You may not hear a difference in sound quality.


----------



## marcus2704

Victorr said:


> Fiio M11 Pro -> (coaxial or USB) to DAC Qutest -> analog input (unbal.) HDV820 -> HP  HD800S
> 
> 
> You may not hear a difference in sound quality.



Perfect, many thanks for your reply


----------



## Victorr

marcus2704 said:


> Perfect, many thanks for your reply


https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-...ef=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B0756VZSWS

*"*_I have the following Amps HDV 820, Chord Hugo2, WA7tp, Dark Voice, Chord Mojo, THX AAA 789 (and more)
And here are some of my headphones:
HD 6xx, HD 700, HD 800, HD 800S, HD 820, Focal Utopia, Fostex Saphire Blue TH-900mk2 (and more)

The Sennheiser 800 series headphones benefit the most from this AMP. It seems to ‘slow down’ certain frequencies to make the soundstage / imaging perfect to my ears.
The DAC section of this is not great but when I use the DAC from the Hugo2 in combination of the Amp from the HDV 820 it sounds great.
This is the only reason I am dropping it to 4 stars.
If you intend to use this amp with HD 800 series headphones ( I actually prefer the HD 800 )
Then consider getting a Chord Qutest DAC to improve the sound along with this amp._*"*


----------



## Cekootje

Hello lovely people, I just wanted to shout out real quick because I'm very excited. I just ordered my Qutest! 
I've been drooling over this thing for almost a year now and finally the day has come! 
First I was interested in a second hand Chord Dac QBD76 (that looks pretty awesome by the way!) but the seller seemed kind of shady so I went with the Qutest!

Hooray!!!!


----------



## Hooster (Oct 14, 2020)

marcus2704 said:


> I have a Sennheiser HDV820 Amp/DAC which powers HD800S headphones.
> 
> I use a Fiio M11 Pro as my source, into the USB-B port of the HDV820.
> 
> ...



Could I incorporate a Qutest into my setup? Yes

Will it improve anything? Not sure, depends how much more you like the Qutest dac over the dac built into the HDV820, if at all.

How to cable them up? Connect the RCA outputs of the Qutest to the RCA inputs of the HDV820. Connect your Fiio to the USB input of the Qutest.

Finally, given the price of the HDV820 it makes little sense to use it as a simple headphone amplifier and bypass the inbuilt dac. You would surely be better off using a Qutest with another cheaper headphone amplifier, most likely bringing better sound for less money.


----------



## silversurfer616

marcus2704 said:


> I have a Sennheiser HDV820 Amp/DAC which powers HD800S headphones.
> 
> I use a Fiio M11 Pro as my source, into the USB-B port of the HDV820.
> 
> ...


I have exactly this configuration as a second system and I prefer the Qutest to the HDV820 dac. The latter sounds too *thick* for my taste whereas the Qutest has just more clarity/resolution. Very easy to flick forth and back, though.


----------



## marcus2704

silversurfer616 said:


> I have exactly this configuration as a second system and I prefer the Qutest to the HDV820 dac. The latter sounds too *thick* for my taste whereas the Qutest has just more clarity/resolution. Very easy to flick forth and back, though.



Is the improvement enough to warrant a demo of the Qutest for use with my HDV820 would you say?


----------



## silversurfer616

marcus2704 said:


> Is the improvement enough to warrant a demo of the Qutest for use with my HDV820 would you say?


I think so. Listened the entire evening yesterday to this setup( mind I don’t have the Fiio but Baby Ambre as Roon endpoint)and it is better with Qutest compared to HDV820 alone...with my ears.


----------



## Simple Man

Finaly, my Qutest bought.
offcourse in a local, 40kms from here, Headphone Specialist.
It is on for a day to break it in. We want the best, don’t we.
Now, I’ve read this entire topic but my memory is to bad so I’ll ask this (again).
How do you all coop with the bnc connections?
Chord thought about everything but why they used these difficult connections is not clear to me at all.
So how do you use your coax to the Qutest?
thank


----------



## gearocdguy

Simple Man said:


> Finaly, my Qutest bought.
> offcourse in a local, 40kms from here, Headphone Specialist.
> It is on for a day to break it in. We want the best, don’t we.
> Now, I’ve read this entire topic but my memory is to bad so I’ll ask this (again).
> ...



RCA female to BNC male adapter.


----------



## Victorr (Oct 16, 2020)

Simple Man said:


> How do you all coop with the bnc connections?


If necessary, I use this kind of cable


----------



## Cekootje

I’ve got a question about the line output. The manual says you can cycle through the output levels at startup. Red: 1v Green 2v blue 3v. But when I cycle through it goes from red to blue to green... what’s up with that?


----------



## moemoney

Cekootje said:


> I’ve got a question about the line output. The manual says you can cycle through the output levels at startup. Red: 1v Green 2v blue 3v. But when I cycle through it goes from red to blue to green... what’s up with that?


that sounds about right, just stop at the one you wish to work with. When I had it I always left it at "Green" and all was good. It's a one-time thing and you don't have to do it every you unplug it, or just leave it on all the time.


----------



## Simple Man

gearocdguy said:


> RCA female to BNC male adapter.


But, freaks as we are, spend lots of money to get the best cable and connection. Is this not a big step down in the chain?


----------



## Simple Man

Victorr said:


> If necessary, I use this kind of cable


Ok, seems fair but it must be a good quality again or not?


----------



## Hooster

Simple Man said:


> Ok, seems fair but it must be a good quality again or not?



Sure, why would you want a poor quality cable?


----------



## HumanMedia (Oct 16, 2020)

Simple Man said:


> Finaly, my Qutest bought.
> offcourse in a local, 40kms from here, Headphone Specialist.
> It is on for a day to break it in. We want the best, don’t we.
> Now, I’ve read this entire topic but my memory is to bad so I’ll ask this (again).
> ...



The BNC are the correct connectors for coax as they match the characteristic impedance of the cable. The RCA connectors are the inferior ones and create reflections in the cable. If your source only has RCA then as others have suggested use an RCA to BNC cable, try and avoid adapters. And the cable needs to be proper 75ohm coax as well, but it doesn’t have to be pricey to be good quality, check out a Belden 1694 made to the right length with whatever connector you need from bluejeans cable, it may be all you ever need.

https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm


----------



## Jon L

HumanMedia said:


> The BNC are the correct connectors for coax as they match the characteristic impedance of the cable. The RCA connectors are the inferior ones and create reflections in the cable. If your source only has RCA then as others have suggested use an RCA to BNC cable, try and avoid adapters. And the cable needs to be proper 75ohm coax



All that is true, but the thing is Chord Qutest, TT2, Mscaler all come with 50 Ohm BNC connectors, not the "proper" 75 Ohm connectors.  
Chord Dave, on the other hand, comes with 75 Ohm BNC connectors.  The connectors all cost the same, so why Chord did this is a total mystery...


----------



## Simple Man

Thanks all for helping!!
so I need to find the 75ohm cable with 1 RCA and one BNC 50ohm connector.
Thanks again. 
other cable advises are welcome.


----------



## Simple Man

I checked the Bluejeans site to order. Looks good to me.
Only thing is to order the 50ohm BNC connector is not clear yet. I send them a mail to ask also for sending to Europe.


----------



## Triode User

Simple Man said:


> I checked the Bluejeans site to order. Looks good to me.
> Only thing is to order the 50ohm BNC connector is not clear yet. I send them a mail to ask also for sending to Europe.



There is a Bluejeans UK / International site and that may be better for you?
http://www.bluejeanscable.co.uk/


----------



## Victorr (Oct 17, 2020)

Simple Man said:


> Ok, seems fair but it must be a good quality again or not?


The quality level depends on the needs and capabilities of a particular user.
There are many people and small firms that make custom cables.

Oh .. Above, colleagues have already talked about everything


----------



## Cekootje

What would be the best way to hook my Bluesound Node to this thing? I’m thinking toslink because there’s no electrical interference? Its quite a long cable though and I’m not even sure it’s pure glass.


----------



## Simple Man

Contacted Bluejeans allready with my wishes and some questions.
To be continued.
Thanks all for help and advise.


----------



## Simple Man

Jon L said:


> All that is true, but the thing is Chord Qutest, TT2, Mscaler all come with 50 Ohm BNC connectors, not the "proper" 75 Ohm connectors.
> Chord Dave, on the other hand, comes with 75 Ohm BNC connectors.  The connectors all cost the same, so why Chord did this is a total mystery...



So if I understand well Chord used not the standard plugs?
Are there special coax cables for Chord or will the 75 ohm fit with the 50 ohm connectors?


----------



## Triode User

Simple Man said:


> So if I understand well Chord used not the standard plugs?
> Are there special coax cables for Chord or will the 75 ohm fit with the 50 ohm connectors?



The discussion of the various BNC sockets on the different Chord items is a slight and needless red herring in my opinion. All accept and work well with standard 75 ohm BNC plugs. So just buy good quality 75 ohm BNC plugs and cables and there will not be compatibility issues.


----------



## Hooster

Triode User said:


> The discussion of the various BNC sockets on the different Chord items is a slight and needless red herring in my opinion. All accept and work well with standard 75 ohm BNC plugs. So just buy good quality 75 ohm BNC plugs and cables and there will not be compatibility issues.



So why do "Chord Qutest, TT2, Mscaler all come with 50 Ohm BNC connectors, not the "proper" 75 Ohm connectors."?


----------



## Triode User

Hooster said:


> So why do "Chord Qutest, TT2, Mscaler all come with 50 Ohm BNC connectors, not the "proper" 75 Ohm connectors."?



You would have to pose your question to @Rob Watts but various answers might be that although they look like 50 ohm they are in reality 75 ohm or another answer might be that in real terms it makes no difference to the functioning of the connection on those DACs. 

Either way, one can say with absolute certainty for anyone seeking to know which termination to use on cables they are buying they should use 75 ohm connectors and cables.

If you just want to pursue the theoretical question then Rob is the man to answer but from answers elsewhere he is super busy at the moment.


----------



## miketlse

Hooster said:


> So why do "Chord Qutest, TT2, Mscaler all come with 50 Ohm BNC connectors, not the "proper" 75 Ohm connectors."?


Maybe it is a similar explanation to this.
It is important for the cable to be 75 Ohm, but the connector has no overall negative impact.


----------



## Triode User

miketlse said:


> Maybe it is a similar explanation to this.
> It is important for the cable to be 75 Ohm, but the connector has no overall negative impact.



 perfect.


----------



## bpcans

Just bought a new Chord Qutest DAC last week and I absolutely love it! It’s on the chain going from my MacBook Pro to my WOO Audio WA6 amp and then out to my Grado GS3000e headphones. The Audioquest Earth RCA interconnects and an Audioquest Diamond USB work perfectly in this setup.


----------



## Hooster (Oct 18, 2020)

Triode User said:


> You would have to pose your question to @Rob Watts but various answers might be that although they look like 50 ohm they are in reality 75 ohm or another answer might be that in real terms it makes no difference to the functioning of the connection on those DACs.
> 
> Either way, one can say with absolute certainty for anyone seeking to know which termination to use on cables they are buying they should use 75 ohm connectors and cables.
> 
> If you just want to pursue the theoretical question then Rob is the man to answer but from answers elsewhere he is super busy at the moment.



Why keep bothering Rob? He does not even work for Chord. Is it too much to ask that someone who actually works for Chord gets off their rear end and answers simple questions about their products?

If you are reading this, Rob, keep up the good work and please tell Chord to be more helpful.

So, let's try again.

Dear PR person at Chord.  

Why do "Chord Qutest, TT2, Mscaler all come with 50 Ohm BNC connectors, not the "proper" 75 Ohm connectors."?


----------



## Triode User

Hooster said:


> Why keep bothering Rob? He does not even work for Chord. Is it too much to ask that someone who actually works for Chord gets off their rear end and answers simple questions about their products?
> 
> If you are reading this, Rob, keep up the good work and please tell Chord to be more helpful.
> 
> ...



I think you are trying, not for the first time, to create a storm in a teacup.

You have been given a link to a post by Rob where he explains that the 50 ohm sockets are of no consequence technically.

I would say that it is possible that they were selected because the centre part of the sockets on the 50 ohm ones are more robust and less susceptible to damage compared to the 75 ohm ones. I am guessing though.

What seems certain though is that the purchasers of those DACs have not been short changed in terms of the technical performance of what they get.

So, remind me again what is the point of your repeated questioning on this?


----------



## Hooster

Triode User said:


> I think you are trying, not for the first time, to create a storm in a teacup.
> 
> You have been given a link to a post by Rob where he explains that the 50 ohm sockets are of no consequence technically.
> 
> ...



I suggest you get off your high horse and mind your own business. I have a genuine question regarding these connectors and I would appreciate a proper answer. Not heckling from other forum members.


----------



## technobear

Hooster said:


> I suggest you get off your high horse and mind your own business. I have a genuine question regarding these connectors and I would appreciate a proper answer. Not heckling from other forum members.


The answer was linked to in this post on the previous page yesterday afternoon but you were too busy whining to notice.

Here is the link: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-hugo-2-the-official-thread.831345/post-15579440


----------



## Hooster

technobear said:


> The answer was linked to in this post on the previous page yesterday afternoon but you were too busy whining to notice.
> 
> Here is the link: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-hugo-2-the-official-thread.831345/post-15579440



That does not answer my question.


----------



## HumanMedia

My guess is that it is all about cost. Lower spec 50ohm BNC are always much cheaper than tightly speccd 70ohm connectors whenever I look at prices at retail suppliers. Maybe there are mountains of them left over from the days of coax ethernet. Perhaps the savings were best used elsewhere with bigger impact. Just a guess.


----------



## bpcans (Oct 27, 2020)

I’m wondering if getting a Chord M-Scaler to go with my Qutest would be a good move, or should I just save up and get the Chord DAVE to take my listening experience to the next level? My feeling is that going for the Hugo TT2 would be an intermediate move, whereas getting the DAVE would open up my listening by adding a speaker system to go along with my new Grado GS3000e headphones. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Hooster

bpcans said:


> I’m wondering if getting a Chord M-Scaler to go with my Qutest would be a good move, or should I just save up and get the Chord DAVE to take my listening experience to the next level? My feeling is that going for the Hugo TT2 would be an intermediate move, whereas getting the DAVE would open up my listening by adding a speaker system to go along with my new Grado GS3000e headphones. Any help would be greatly appreciated.



By all means, get a Dave but you don't need a Dave to add a speaker system...


----------



## bpcans

Hooster said:


> By all means, get a Dave but you don't need a Dave to add a speaker system...


Yes sir Hooter. Adding the Chord Qutest to my headphone system was an illumination.


----------



## GreenBow (Oct 27, 2020)

bpcans said:


> I’m wondering if getting a Chord M-Scaler to go with my Qutest would be a good move, or should I just save up and get the Chord DAVE to take my listening experience to the next level? My feeling is that going for the Hugo TT2 would be an intermediate move, whereas getting the DAVE would open up my listening by adding a speaker system to go along with my new Grado GS3000e headphones. Any help would be greatly appreciated.



In your position with the choices you have laid out, there is no bad option.

Once you move to DAVE or TT2 you can do away with a headphone amp. It will be an upgrade on many fronts. Buying an M-Scaler is by all accounts a brilliant move too.

If you are asking what would I do. Like you, I have no idea. It would depend on what I wanted where. Am not thinking about any of it though, because as of now I am happy with TT2.

I have a Qutest as back up, in case my TT2 goes for repair. Plus it does menial work like YouTube etc. If I moved my TT2 or it went for repair, I would use Qutest for amplifier. Then Hugo 2 for headphones, so I never ran line level to an amplifier, and headphone out from my Hugo 2. Just so I never accidentally blow my ears out.

TT2 is also capable of driving speakers to reasonable volume. (As is DAVE but no as loud.) Meaning TT2 is sort of ambidextrous. TT2 driving speakers is mind-boggling.


----------



## bpcans

GreenBow said:


> In your position with the choices you have laid out, there is no bad option.
> 
> Once you move to DAVE or TT2 you can do away with a headphone amp. It will be an upgrade on many fronts. Buying an M-Scaler is by all accounts a brilliant move too.
> 
> ...


I auditioned my Grado GS3000e’s thru a Chord Hugo TT2 and a Focal amp, which is what sold me on the headphones. I’d like to upgrade my amp considering that my next move if I wanted to stay with a Woo amp would be going to their WA22 which costs $2,500 not including upgraded tubes. So now I would be at close to $4K with the appropriate cables. I’ve read that the TT2 is a good middle ground, but I find the DAVE to be intriguing option given all of my other options.


----------



## moemoney

GreenBow said:


> In your position with the choices you have laid out, there is no bad option.
> 
> Once you move to DAVE or TT2 you can do away with a headphone amp. It will be an upgrade on many fronts. Buying an M-Scaler is by all accounts a brilliant move too.
> 
> ...


Just based on these pages that I’ve been reading it seems like the Dave is a good choice but he can’t play headphones that require a lot of power like the abyss and the hifiman susvara with the Dave you would need a headphone amp to make Those two headphones come alive. If you go with a TT2 you will have more choices.  If you want to add speakers or drive hard to drive headphones no problem. I have the best of both worlds the MTT2 and Woo Audio wa 5LE, SS some days Tubes others And both can play almost any headphone.


----------



## faivecr

Hello. I'm about to buy a Chord Qutest. I have a Chord Mojo, a cheap Schiit Multibit and a Topping E30 and the internal dac (ESS SABRE) that comes with my NAD M10. Though scientists say there's no difference in sound between DAC, I can hear some difference between those DACs, mostly when comparing the MOJO vs the E30. Because the upgrade bug has bitten me and I'm always trying to get better sound, I pointing towards the Qutest based on all the great reviews I've read.

My simple question is: Being that my preference is on the most analytical/most detailed possible sound, do you think the Qutest is the right DAC to choose or do you know a better one in that analytical/detailed sound? I love hearing each and every subtle details of the recording as well as having the best imaging and soundstage possible.

Would you recommend me the Qutest? I do my hearing basically using streaming services like TIDAL MASTERS and QOBUZ HI - RES. I know the QUTEST doesnt handle MQA files but I guess the HI RES versions on QOBUZ should be the same? I'm also willing to buy music at HDTRACKS.

Thank you very much for your suggestions and recommendations!


----------



## RobertSM

bpcans said:


> Just bought a new Chord Qutest DAC last week and I absolutely love it! It’s on the chain going from my MacBook Pro to my WOO Audio WA6 amp and then out to my Grado GS3000e headphones. The Audioquest Earth RCA interconnects and an Audioquest Diamond USB work perfectly in this setup.




Nice rig!

I run a very similar setup. Macbook pro-->Chord Qutest-->Woo Audio WA6-SE-->ZMF Verite headphones. This system brings me great joy!


----------



## bpcans

RobertSM said:


> Nice rig!
> 
> I run a very similar setup. Macbook pro-->Chord Qutest-->Woo Audio WA6-SE-->ZMF Verite headphones. This system brings me great joy!


Thanks for responding RobertSM. I thought for a minute that I might be the only one running a similar setup. In the last few days I’ve found myself being pulled and prodded toward getting the Chord Hugo TT2 DAC/headphone amplifier, which I know to be a great piece of gear because I auditioned my Grado GS3000e’s thru one. But ultimately I’m a tube guy who enjoys looking at the glowing glass tubes. My next stop on the train to audio nirvana might be a Woo WA22 fully balanced amp.


----------



## Reactcore

faivecr said:


> Hello. I'm about to buy a Chord Qutest. I have a Chord Mojo, a cheap Schiit Multibit and a Topping E30 and the internal dac (ESS SABRE) that comes with my NAD M10. Though scientists say there's no difference in sound between DAC, I can hear some difference between those DACs, mostly when comparing the MOJO vs the E30. Because the upgrade bug has bitten me and I'm always trying to get better sound, I pointing towards the Qutest based on all the great reviews I've read.
> 
> My simple question is: Being that my preference is on the most analytical/most detailed possible sound, do you think the Qutest is the right DAC to choose or do you know a better one in that analytical/detailed sound? I love hearing each and every subtle details of the recording as well as having the best imaging and soundstage possible.
> 
> ...



You won't be disappointed.
I also went from mojo to Qutest mainly because i can switch the 'warm' filter off that is fixed in mojo. It opens up the top end giving better perceived soundstage and micro details imo.
Further it has a better refined sound overall.

And later u can upgrade it further using the Mscaler.


----------



## Steve Wilcox

I use a Qutest and love it.  But you might want to check out the RME ADI 2 which is getting a lot of love and maybe has even more detail.


----------



## greenblured (Dec 12, 2022)

Steve Wilcox said:


> I use a Qutest and love it.  But you might want to check out the RME ADI 2 which is getting a lot of love and maybe has even more detail.


Or checking out a LPS. Many of us got a nice upgrade with the Allo or Sbooster.


----------



## Triode User

Steve Wilcox said:


> I use a Qutest and love it.  But you might want to check out the RME ADI 2 which is getting a lot of love and maybe has even more detail.



I had the RME ADI 2 and was able to compare it back to back with my Qutest over a number of weeks. You say maybe the RME ADI 2 has more detail but to me it was simply harsher, so much so that I could only listen to it by selecting a filter that had significant top end roll off. Also, despite the protestations of the RME ADI 2 designer I found that it was really very susceptible to the quality of the power supply and the factory one did it no favours. The RME ADI 2 was not a keeper by any stretch of the imagination and was sold as soon as I could.


----------



## Triode User

greenblured said:


> Or checking out a LPS. Many of us got a nice upgrade witth the Allo or Shbooster.



Agreed although for me the Allo was improved significantly by changing out the factory captive DC output leads. I liked the SBooster a lot (more than the Allo) but I have now settled on using a Farad Super3 as being even better.


----------



## Simple Man

Simple Man said:


> Thanks all for helping!!
> so I need to find the 75ohm cable with 1 RCA and one BNC 50ohm connector.
> Thanks again.
> other cable advises are welcome.



I did buy a custom made coax, better quality, cable with the right plugs.
Now after playing cd’s all day long it seems all to fit great.
Sound with lot of details, rythm and soundstage.
At this moment I have a Siltech between the Cutest and the V280. 
Hopefully I’ll recieve a JohnVanGent interlink today to finish this set up for a while.


----------



## ajreynol

Steve Wilcox said:


> I use a Qutest and love it.  But you might want to check out the RME ADI 2 which is getting a lot of love and maybe has even more detail.


ooof.

Suddenly giving me the itch for a new DAC. Enjoying my OG 2Cute, but always open to an upgrade. ADI-2 looks pretty sweet.


----------



## SLMStyles (Nov 4, 2020)

ajreynol said:


> ooof.
> 
> Suddenly giving me the itch for a new DAC. Enjoying my OG 2Cute, but always open to an upgrade. ADI-2 looks pretty sweet.


I went from a Hugo 2 (actually 2 Hugo 2’s) to the RME ADI 2 DAC.
I really love Chord stuff, and if I come into a pile of cash, I’ll probably spring for a TT2

That being said, I don’t feel like I lost any sound quality with the RME. Actually, my Andros sound better/quieter/cleaner out of the ADI-2.
I can also slightly tweak my HD800S with a bit of EQ, and it made them more enjoyable. 

(I know the discussion is about the Qutest, but there’s definitely some similarities with the Hugo 2)


----------



## Hooster

ajreynol said:


> ooof.
> 
> Suddenly giving me the itch for a new DAC. Enjoying my OG 2Cute, but always open to an upgrade. ADI-2 looks pretty sweet.



If you must have an AK dac, then why not go for the Topping D90 with the AK4499 chip?


----------



## bpcans

ajreynol said:


> ooof.
> 
> Suddenly giving me the itch for a new DAC. Enjoying my OG 2Cute, but always open to an upgrade. ADI-2 looks pretty sweet.


ajreynol, I know exactly how having that new gear itch feels because I just today ordered a brand new Woo Audio WA22 headphone amplifier. Stupid me. Lol. But when it comes to getting a new DAC I can’t recommend highly enough the Chord Qutest. Super nice construction with a sound that is very clean and satisfyingly musical. And it doesn’t cost $10K.


----------



## RobertSM (Nov 5, 2020)

Has anyone seen these? New Qutest system stand. This picture shows Quest and the phono stage pre-amp stacked. This is supposed to keep your Qutest cool and I think will help with isolation. These individual units are stackable.

I'm planning on getting one. I keep my Qutest in-between the two chassis of my Woo Audio WA6-SE. I had always thought in the back of my mind that further isolating Qutest(might) give a bit of sonic benefit. Either way I like the clean look and I think it will work well for me.

Thoughts?






https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/qutest-stand-system/


----------



## Hooster

Never seen that. How much is it and what does the rumble button do?


----------



## miketlse

RobertSM said:


> Has anyone seen these? New Qutest system stand. This picture shows Quest and the phono stage pre-amp stacked. This is supposed to keep your Qutest cool and I think will help with isolation. These individual units are stackable.
> 
> I'm planning on getting one. I keep my Qutest in-between the two chassis of my Woo Audio WA6-SE. I had always thought in the back of my mind that further isolating Qutest(might) give a bit of sonic benefit. Either way I like the clean look and I think it will work well for me.
> 
> ...


Looks smart.
Hopefully the Qutest family will soon include a digital amp, streamer, plus a mini mscaler that will fit in that stand system.
Calm down everyone, but it always helps to dream in these troubled covid times.


----------



## miketlse

Hooster said:


> Never seen that. How much is it and what does the rumble button do?


https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/huei/


----------



## RobertSM

Hooster said:


> Never seen that. How much is it and what does the rumble button do?




I'm not sure about the price. As far as I know this was just announced. 

In regards to the rumble button. That's a feature on the Chord phono stage. In the picture I posted the Chord Qutest is the unit on top, in it's own system stand. The bottom unit, is the phono stage in it's own system stand. These are two separate units stacked upon each other. Hope this helps.


----------



## emgineer

I like the stand, must have just come out.   Been using a piece of patagonian rosewood (not a real rosewood) as a stand, it has more mass than the Qutest and I think its makes a difference.


----------



## RobertSM

Here are two pictures of my rig. As you can see my qutest sits right in the middle of two tube amp chassis. Tube amps, all of them vibrate. Even a little tiny bit. Some much more. So my thought was that this vibration may translate to the qutest and may cause levels of distortion.

I'm really thinking this new qutest system stand will help keep qutest cool and help isolate it.


----------



## elira

That stand looks perfect for a mini M scaler.


----------



## Victorr

RobertSM said:


> Has anyone seen these? New Qutest system stand. This picture shows Quest and the phono stage pre-amp stacked. This is supposed to keep your Qutest cool and I think will help with isolation. These individual units are stackable.


Pictured are two shelves, each selling for £ 275 (£ 550 total).
This is beyond common sense.


----------



## Clemmaster

RobertSM said:


> Here are two pictures of my rig. As you can see my qutest sits right in the middle of two tube amp chassis. Tube amps, all of them vibrate. Even a little tiny bit. Some much more. So my thought was that this vibration may translate to the qutest and may cause levels of distortion.
> 
> I'm really thinking this new qutest system stand will help keep qutest cool and help isolate it.


Your headband is angry:


----------



## RobertSM

Victorr said:


> Pictured are two shelves, each selling for £ 275 (£ 550 total).
> This is beyond common sense.



Victor, you know very well that most if not all common sense gets thrown out when one spends any significant time in this hobby.


----------



## Victorr (Nov 5, 2020)

Victorr said:


> Pictured are two shelves, each selling for £ 275 (£ 550 total).
> This is beyond common sense.


Sorry, £ 245. This radically changes the matter


----------



## Hooster

Victorr said:


> Pictured are two shelves, each selling for £ 275 (£ 550 total).
> This is beyond common sense.



Call it as you like. Apparently Chord prices all their products equally "sensibly".


----------



## bpcans

RobertSM said:


> Here are two pictures of my rig. As you can see my qutest sits right in the middle of two tube amp chassis. Tube amps, all of them vibrate. Even a little tiny bit. Some much more. So my thought was that this vibration may translate to the qutest and may cause levels of distortion.
> 
> I'm really thinking this new qutest system stand will help keep qutest cool and help isolate it.


I love Goldbears! They’re delicious! How do you like your WA6-SE RobertSM?


----------



## bpcans

RobertSM said:


> Victor, you know very well that most if not all common sense gets thrown out when one spends any significant time in this hobby.


$361.70 is a lot to pay for common sense, at least here in Minnesota RobertSM.


----------



## RobertSM

bpcans said:


> I love Goldbears! They’re delicious! How do you like your WA6-SE RobertSM?




I really like it! The WA6SE has the design advantages that it is a two chassis amp with tube rectifier instead of SS, and no coupling capacitor in the signal path - direct coupling between input and output tube stages. What that means is the listener will really get alot of tube sound.


----------



## RobertSM

bpcans said:


> $361.70 is a lot to pay for common sense, at least here in Minnesota RobertSM.



Agreed. Let's see how much the price will be for USA customers. It's not something I would buy on a whim. But maybe....


----------



## Hooster (Nov 5, 2020)

That stand is actually a bargain. The stand for DAVE is 1450 pounds, or about $2000. That is of course just for 1 individual level...
https://www.hifisound.co.uk/analogu...nds-platforms-c45/choral-ensemble-stand-p1099


----------



## Clemmaster

You're in a Chord sub-forum, what did you expect? Everything they make is overpriced


----------



## mraulino

just noticed that the 2Qute was released in Jan-2015 and the Qutest three years later in Jan-2018...
Any expectations for Jan-2021?


----------



## elira

mraulino said:


> just noticed that the 2Qute was released in Jan-2015 and the Qutest three years later in Jan-2018...
> Any expectations for Jan-2021?


Balanced qutest would be nice.


----------



## HumanMedia (Nov 7, 2020)

mraulino said:


> just noticed that the 2Qute was released in Jan-2015 and the Qutest three years later in Jan-2018...
> Any expectations for Jan-2021?



ive been thinking the same. The Qute line gets updated regularly.
Personally I would love a Qute4 with an enhanced WTA2 output stage with volume control and no other changes. So those of us with MScalers don’t need to buy TT2 to get an equivalent sound.

Oh and a 12v DC supply with DC barrel connector to avoid fiddley USB power connector and one less switcher in the chain (which currently takes 5V to 12v internally.)


----------



## cotic54

I have had my M-scaler and Quetest hooked up with a standard plastic Toslink cable from an OPPO 205 since it was installed, recently I bought and installed a JIB digital Toslink cable for a very reasonable 35ish euros on Amazon and am reporting here as it has made considerable gains in clarity and naturalness. I had tried spdif but encountered interference from light switches. In my opinion, this JIB Toslink is well worth the price.
I could only find one review (which I read after purchase).
JIB ‘Digital Glass’ Toslink Cable | Ultra High-End Audio and Home Theater Review


----------



## royiko

Well, Chord Hugo 2 was introduced in early 2017. I am not sure whether they will make a new version. I mean they just introduced 2go this year. Looks like they are willing to let it run for longer. Given that, I would at least wait till next Jan to decide whether invest a Qutest/Hugo


----------



## uzi2

cotic54 said:


> I have had my M-scaler and Quetest hooked up with a standard plastic Toslink cable from an OPPO 205 since it was installed, recently I bought and installed a JIB digital Toslink cable for a very reasonable 35ish euros on Amazon and am reporting here as it has made considerable gains in clarity and naturalness. I had tried spdif but encountered interference from light switches. In my opinion, this JIB Toslink is well worth the price.
> I could only find one review (which I read after purchase).
> JIB ‘Digital Glass’ Toslink Cable | Ultra High-End Audio and Home Theater Review


Quality at a reasonable price. I will never understand why they go for the gold plastic on optical cables, though...


----------



## bpcans

Today I upgraded from a Chord Qutest to a Hugo TT2 DAC amp. I’ve got a fully balanced Woo WA22 amp arriving this coming week. I can only hope that this DAC will complete the redux of my whole headphone listening experience.


----------



## nwavesailor (Nov 7, 2020)

The silver TT2 sound WAY better! 
 I also went from a Qutest to the TT2 initially paired with a LP and now with a Pendant.


----------



## Reactcore

bpcans said:


> Today I upgraded from a Chord Qutest to a Hugo TT2 DAC amp.



Did you consider to go for Mscaler pair up with Qutest too.. Or u own one already?


----------



## bpcans

Reactcore said:


> Did you consider to go for Mscaler pair up with Qutest too.. Or u own one already?


I auditioned an Mscaler hooked up to a Hugo TT2 a couple of weeks ago. I wasn’t that impressed. I’m an hp guy and I like to keep my listening chain as simple as possible. Going from the Qutest to the TT2 was the real revealing upgrade to my system. IMO the Mscaler only added maybe another 10 to 15% of enjoyment, and only on a few of my recordings. Not worth another $5K to me at this time.


----------



## miketlse

royiko said:


> Well, Chord Hugo 2 was introduced in early 2017. I am not sure whether they will make a new version. I mean they just introduced 2go this year. Looks like they are willing to let it run for longer. Given that, I would at least wait till next Jan to decide whether invest a Qutest/Hugo


Read the interview Chord gave in 2019. The reference to streamers extending the product life, implies that Hugo 2 will not be replaced in the near future.


----------



## Reactcore (Nov 11, 2020)

bpcans said:


> I auditioned an Mscaler hooked up to a Hugo TT2 a couple of weeks ago. I wasn’t that impressed. I’m an hp guy and I like to keep my listening chain as simple as possible. Going from the Qutest to the TT2 was the real revealing upgrade to my system. IMO the Mscaler only added maybe another 10 to 15% of enjoyment, and only on a few of my recordings. Not worth another $5K to me at this time.



Do you still have the Qutest.. and if yes did you tried connecting your HP directly to the RCA's? I use it that way.. cause i figured any amp in the chain only decreases SQ. Imo TT2 sounds better mainly caused of this.

I would like to compare a TT2 to a direct driven Qutest side by side..

I'm still in a strugle whether or not to fight my non HiFi believing wife for justification to drain our wallet for the Mscaler If only i knew the price would get adjusted in the future😆


----------



## bpcans

Reactcore said:


> Do you still have the Qutest.. and if yes did you tried connecting your HP directly to the RCA's? I use it that way.. cause i figured any amp in the chain only decreases SQ. Imo TT2 sounds better mainly caused of this.
> 
> I would like to compare a TT2 to a direct driven Qutest side by side..
> 
> I'm still in a strugle whether or not to fight my non HiFi believing wife for justification to drain our wallet for the Mscaler If only i knew the price would get adjusted in the future😆


No Reactcore, I traded my Qutest for the Hugo TT2 because the TT sounds at least twice as good, and because it gives me so many more listening options than the Qutest. I use this Woo WA22 headphone amplifier to drive my Grado GS3000e hp’s. If there are any weaknesses in your listening chain this amp will reveal them, and this amp told me that I’d be a fool not to get the TT2. Mmmm, let me see, Chord Mscaler or a all inclusive trip to the Bahamas for my family? Our flight leaves next week.


----------



## Hooster

bpcans said:


> Mmmm, let me see, Chord Mscaler or a *all inclusive trip to the Bahamas for my family?* Our flight leaves next week.



Sounds like you have your priorities straight. I would not buy something like an Mscaler unless the amount of money it costs was totally insignificant to me and I could easily afford something like an all inclusive trip to somewhere nice too.

If you must have the Mscaler, just wait a little. I can assure you that the price of hardware and software can only go down. They might even lose the Fisher Price colored ball styling. Now that would sure be a bonus!


----------



## bpcans

Hooster said:


> Sounds like you have your priorities straight. I would not buy something like an Mscaler unless the amount of money it costs was totally insignificant to me and I could easily afford something like an all inclusive trip to somewhere nice too.
> 
> If you must have the Mscaler, just wait a little. I can assure you that the price of hardware and software can only go down. They might even lose the Fisher Price colored ball styling. Now that would sure be a bonus!


Hooster, I’ll take a more serious look at an Mscaler, or something like it, when John Watts at Chord figures out what the technology to be determined later is. Thus the three Fischer Price colored balls that don’t indicate anything.


----------



## arjuna93

Hooster said:


> If you must have an AK dac, then why not go for the Topping D90 with the AK4499 chip?



Beause RME is a much better DAC than Topping.


----------



## Hooster

arjuna93 said:


> Beause RME is a much better DAC than Topping.



Thanks, good to know...


----------



## leilei787

Hi Guys, i am a new owner of Qutest Dac. I am using Bluesound Node 2i connecting to Qutest with a Optical cable. With Bluesound app streaming Tidal Master, the Qutest shows green color which is only 24bit 96khz....does anyone know the best method to connect Qutest to get higher than 96Khz from Tidal Master?

Also if i use Tidal connect to bluesound, qutest shows red color which is 44 khz only...wonder how you guys connect yours

thank you!!


----------



## royiko

leilei787 said:


> Hi Guys, i am a new owner of Qutest Dac. I am using Bluesound Node 2i connecting to Qutest with a Optical cable. With Bluesound app streaming Tidal Master, the Qutest shows green color which is only 24bit 96khz....does anyone know the best method to connect Qutest to get higher than 96Khz from Tidal Master?
> 
> Also if i use Tidal connect to bluesound, qutest shows red color which is 44 khz only...wonder how you guys connect yours
> 
> thank you!!



The problem is MQA. Only DAC support MQA can unfold the file. Qutest doesn't support MQA, thus it can only play 44.1khz. I use Raspberry pi as an HQPlayer bridge to connect my Hugo 2.


----------



## miketlse

leilei787 said:


> Hi Guys, i am a new owner of Qutest Dac. I am using Bluesound Node 2i connecting to Qutest with a Optical cable. With Bluesound app streaming Tidal Master, the Qutest shows green color which is only 24bit 96khz....does anyone know the best method to connect Qutest to get higher than 96Khz from Tidal Master?
> 
> Also if i use Tidal connect to bluesound, qutest shows red color which is 44 khz only...wonder how you guys connect yours
> 
> thank you!!


Your qutest will only be guaranteed to work up to 24/96KHz


From a PM with Matt Bartlett.
'All our DACs are capable of 24/192KHz over optical. However the spec and design of spdif optical means at this rate it is right on the edge of working. This means you need to keep the optical cable as short as possible, use glass fibre if possible and then the fibre in the plugs has to be perfectly aligned so that there is no mismatch when plugged into the receiver in the DAC. So there are lots of factors that can cause optical to fail at 24/192KHz.
Added to this around 2 years ago Sony in particular (but also the optical component manufacturers) announced that they would stop support of 24/192KHz via optical and there was a recommendation that the spec was reduced to 24/96KHz for all consumer products to help reduce the confusion and the number of customer support cases.
This means that for us we had no guarantee that the source would actually work correctly at 24/192KHz, whether the optical cable was capable of passing the signal up to 24/192KHz, and then finally on top of that any cable mismatch issue would also cause problems.

So we have decided to simply things and start to change the spec of all our products to only guarantee operation at 24/96KHz to avoid any confusion or upset when higher rates do not work correctly. So yes there is a difference between ratified which means we can guarantee operation and technical capable of where it can do it if the correct conditions are met.'


----------



## leilei787

thank you!

i also connect a USB cable from my PC to chord qutest, the color is green, 96Khz, is this normal as well? so the highest sample rate we can get from qutest from Tidal is 96khz only?


----------



## DesignTaylor

Hey gang, sharing my experiences with the Qutest and TT 2, hope someone finds the perspective useful.


----------



## royiko

DesignTaylor said:


> Hey gang, sharing my experiences with the Qutest and TT 2, hope someone finds the perspective useful.




Nice review. You did a brief comparison between Qutest vs Ares 2.  Would you like to share a bit more?


----------



## arjuna93

I heard from a friend who has Hugo and Hugo 2 and also TT and TT2 that second generation sounds substantially _worse_ to him. He uses HD800, Beyer Tesla and JH Layla if that matters.

Could anyone comment on this? I am thinking of whether it makes better sense to get 2Qute or Qutest, and they apparently share characteristics with Hugos and possibly TTs.


----------



## bikutoru (Nov 18, 2020)

arjuna93 said:


> I heard from a friend who has Hugo and Hugo 2 and also TT and TT2 that second generation sounds substantially _worse_ to him. He uses HD800, Beyer Tesla and JH Layla if that matters.
> 
> Could anyone comment on this? I am thinking of whether it makes better sense to get 2Qute or Qutest, and they apparently share characteristics with Hugos and possibly TTs.


I went from Mojo to 2Qute(because wanted it for my speaker system), to Qutest/HMS and finally to TT2/HMS. Still keep the 2Qute in my desktop system.
We all have different hearings but I just have no idea how can it sound worse. 2Qute sounds great, Qutest a little better.
I'd be happy with any of Chord's DAC and I'm.


----------



## miketlse

arjuna93 said:


> I heard from a friend who has Hugo and Hugo 2 and also TT and TT2 that second generation sounds substantially _worse_ to him. He uses HD800, Beyer Tesla and JH Layla if that matters.
> 
> Could anyone comment on this? I am thinking of whether it makes better sense to get 2Qute or Qutest, and they apparently share characteristics with Hugos and possibly TTs.


Maybe @Whazzzup could give a view.

Everything that I read about the TT suggests a musical sound signature.
I like Beyer Tesla headphone drivers, but some owners would describe them as bright.


----------



## Whazzzup

Well I wouldn’t say worse at all, I haven’t heard tt2 and probably won’t. But yes hugo sounded darker, better slam, probably better vocal impact through its higher distortion than h2, tt was better to me than Hugo all around. But that’s my preference and why I haven’t bothered to even test tt2. Don’t know if it helps.


----------



## miketlse

arjuna93 said:


> I heard from a friend who has Hugo and Hugo 2 and also TT and TT2 that second generation sounds substantially _worse_ to him. He uses HD800, Beyer Tesla and JH Layla if that matters.
> 
> Could anyone comment on this? I am thinking of whether it makes better sense to get 2Qute or Qutest, and they apparently share characteristics with Hugos and possibly TTs.


Also bear in mind that the 2Qute had many fans on the Naim forums, from Naim fans who preferred to use the 2Qute as the source for their Naim systems (instead of a Naim dac).
Suggests good synergy between the 2Qute and Naim amplifiers;


----------



## DesignTaylor

royiko said:


> Nice review. You did a brief comparison between Qutest vs Ares 2. Would you like to share a bit more?



Thanks! I found the Ares to be smoother, maybe a bit more "natural" sounding. It still has lots of detail but for my set up I prefer the Chord DACs. The Qutest brings more definition to each element. More separation without being cold or clinical. My primary head amp is a SET tube rig so it already has a warmer presentation. The detail of the Qutest and TT 2 in that configuration works well. If I was using a more exacting SS setup like a THX amp or something I would probably want the Ares. 

Here are my impressions on the Ares (aka another long-winded rant):


----------



## arjuna93

bikutoru said:


> I went from Mojo to 2Qute(because wanted it for my speaker system), to Qutest/HMS and finally to TT2/HMS. Still keep the 2Qute in my desktop system.
> We all have different hearings but I just have no idea how can it sound worse. 2Qute sounds great, Qutest a little better.
> I'd be happy with any of Chord's DAC and I'm.



Thank you. Great Fudō Myōō ^_^


----------



## Relaxasaurus

DesignTaylor said:


> Hey gang, sharing my experiences with the Qutest and TT 2, hope someone finds the perspective useful.


Killer review! I'm a previous subscriber and like your content.  We have similar thoughts on the Chord sound. Must be review season, mine is up as well. Really dig Chord gear now.







If the Qutest didn't exist I'd have a Gumby which is also very engaging to my ears. 👍👍


----------



## Light - Man

Relaxasaurus said:


> Killer review! I'm a previous subscriber and like your content.  We have similar thoughts on the Chord sound. Must be review season, mine is up as well. Really dig Chord gear now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow, that 2Qute sure looks like a 'Plain Jane' and not at all 2 Quite by half!

I hate to say it, but compared to the 2Qute, the Qutest is the ugly child!


----------



## DesignTaylor

Relaxasaurus said:


> We have similar thoughts on the Chord sound. Must be review season, mine is up as well. Really dig Chord gear now.



Oh man, excellent review! I wish this video had dropped a year ago, you would have saved me some time and money  I think you really nailed it.


----------



## Relaxasaurus

DesignTaylor said:


> Oh man, excellent review! I wish this video had dropped a year ago, you would have saved me some time and money  I think you really nailed it.


Nah it's always good to hear multiple perspectives. The TT2 and the M Scaler really blew my mind but you do bring up a good point that the Qutest is like 90% of the way there (sans m scaler).


----------



## Christer (Nov 20, 2020)

Light - Man said:


> Wow, that 2Qute sure looks like a 'Plain Jane' and not at all 2 Quite by half!
> 
> I hate to say it, but compared to the 2Qute, the Qutest is the ugly child!


In Qutest's defence, imho it's not about looks.  On its own  Qutest has got competition yes.  But in combination with a Chord Mscaler and closed eyes while listening the only combo I can think of that actually sounds notably better and even more realistic with really  well recorded acoustic music is Chord's Dave with an Mscaler.
And unlike both TT2 and Dave Qutest travels well! 
Not that that seems to matter much for the forseeable future unfortunately, but it served me well on my travels for two years.
I could just about squeeze both a camera with lenses and an Mscaler  in my camera backpack  and put little Qutest in a pocket on my photo vest together with cabling and hardrives and a portable headphone amp and get onboard lots of flights to the Tropics in winter.
Happy days!
Cheers CC


----------



## Chop-Top

Relaxasaurus said:


> Killer review! I'm a previous subscriber and like your content.  We have similar thoughts on the Chord sound. Must be review season, mine is up as well. Really dig Chord gear now.



Excellent review also!  So is the Qutest your top preference of the DAC's reviewed (with the exception of the TT2/ Mscaler)?


----------



## Neweymatt

Relaxasaurus said:


> Killer review! I'm a previous subscriber and like your content.  We have similar thoughts on the Chord sound. Must be review season, mine is up as well. Really dig Chord gear now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Great review! Appreciate the confirmation bias on my recent purchase of a BF2, can't find enough time in the day to listen to it.  Being still a bit of a noob to headfi , this is my first DAC, and when I was shopping around I really couldn't justify the 2x price for Qutest; I can get another pair of headphones for those $$ for now otherwise...

That said, I did have a listen to Qutest when figuring out what HP to get next, and yeah it's really something special.  At some stage I'm sure I'll 'need' another listening station around the house and Qutest will be a strong contender..


----------



## Relaxasaurus (Nov 21, 2020)

Chop-Top said:


> Excellent review also!  So is the Qutest your top preference of the DAC's reviewed (with the exception of the TT2/ Mscaler)?


Yes, though I think Ares is something special as well. Also need to stress how much I liked the Gumby. It's such a great DAC that I would spend seemingly hours with.



Neweymatt said:


> Great review! Appreciate the confirmation bias on my recent purchase of a BF2, can't find enough time in the day to listen to it.  Being still a bit of a noob to headfi , this is my first DAC, and when I was shopping around I really couldn't justify the 2x price for Qutest; I can get another pair of headphones for those $$ for now otherwise...


Yes, definitely save your money for headphones first. BF2 is a great DAC for someone still new to the hobby.


----------



## DesignTaylor

Relaxasaurus said:


> BF2 is a great DAC for someone still new to the hobby.



The SMSL SU-8 is also a great starting point if you are looking for an solid DAC with a warmer / natural presentation for under $200. I also recently got a Mini and that thing is amazing for the price (both as a DAC and portable amp). Used they go for around $300. That may be my new go to recommendation for folks getting into head-fi. I'll do a quick video review soon.


----------



## kkrazik2008

Relaxasaurus said:


> Killer review! I'm a previous subscriber and like your content.  We have similar thoughts on the Chord sound. Must be review season, mine is up as well. Really dig Chord gear now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wonderful comparison video, been waiting for something like this! I have been deliberating between the Bitfrost 2 and a used Qutest.  Yes they two completely different price points, in terms of value the former seems like a no-brainer whereas I was on the fence if paying nearly double for the Qutest would get me further along than other $1600 DACs.  Now if you somehow have access to a Yggy, would love to see some comparisons to the Qutest


----------



## nairbil

What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?


----------



## Jon L

nairbil said:


> What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?



While Qutest/A90 combo will sound great, if I had A90, I would be looking at DAC's that have true balanced XLR outputs since A90 is often reported to sound best run balanced.
Chord DAC's are inherently single-ended, and note that Qutest only has RCA outputs, which is part of the reason I chose Qutest because I planned on tube amps that are single-ended only and did not want to pay for balanced outputs I will not use.


----------



## DesignTaylor

nairbil said:


> What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?



Jon makes a good point. If you are committed to the Qutest then you don't necessarly need an amp with a truly balanced architecture. That being said there are also plenty of advantages to running balanced HP output even if your source is not balanced. 

It really comes down to the whole synergy of your setup and what you are trying to achieve sonically. The Qutest has a lot of definition and detail so if you pair it with an exacting amp you will end up with a very revealing but potentially cold and analytical sound. If you pair it with a warm SS or tube amp you may end up with a more harmonious setup. But really comes down to your personal preference. 

What HPs are you running?


----------



## technobear

nairbil said:


> What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?


If you're going to spend £600 or more on an amp, you might like to check out the Chord Hugo 2 instead unless you have particular requirements like valve distortion or huge amounts of power.


----------



## bpcans

nairbil said:


> What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?


IMO the Qutest is a very good dedicated DAC that nothing else compares to at its price point. And because Chords technology is so good the Qutest as a result is very revealing. When I had one I paired it with my Woo Audio WA6 single-ended tube amp. The sound was expansive, lush, and extremely satisfying. My vote would be for a good tube amp instead of anything solid state unless you're going to spend a few extra pesos and get something really nice in the price range of the Qutest.


----------



## RobertSM (Nov 28, 2020)

Brand new to me. The Chord Qutest System Stand.

Top-notch milled aluminum stand allows Qutest to slide right in. As you can see I'm using this stand to hold my Qutest in-between to separate chassis of my Woo Audio WA6-SE tube amp. My thought is that it should help Qutest isolate from vibration from the tube amp. Also should help Qutest stay cool as it lifts Qutest slightly off the desk surface.

I love it!


----------



## Simple Man

@RobertSM : how about the Qutest compaired to to your ( former) V850?
Is there a particular reason you use a Qutest now?
Just wondering.


----------



## RobertSM

Simple Man said:


> @RobertSM : how about the Qutest compaired to to your ( former) V850?
> Is there a particular reason you use a Qutest now?
> Just wondering.



I still own and use the V850. It is the DAC I use for my two-channel system. The Qutest anchors my headphone system. I love them both.


----------



## kkrazik2008

RobertSM said:


> Brand new to me. The Chord Qutest System Stand.
> 
> Top-notch milled aluminum stand allows Qutest to slide right in. As you can see I'm using this stand to hold my Qutest in-between to separate chassis of my Woo Audio WA6-SE tube amp. My though is that it should help Qutest isolate from vibration from the tube amp. Also should help Qutest stay cool as it lifts Qutest slightly off the desk surface.
> 
> I love it!


Very nice fit and finish! This should be their marketing poster too.


----------



## jwbrent

nairbil said:


> What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?



I pair mine with a HeadAmp Pico Power, a battery operated portable amplifier using a discreet output stage. Mates very nicely with the Qutest, and with a battery power supply for the Qutest, you’re off the grid. 😁


----------



## Reactcore (Nov 29, 2020)

nairbil said:


> What amps does the qutest pair well with? Would it work with something like the A90?



As im reading this i'm just enjoying my Qutest without a amp.

I bought a Questyle current mode amp to combine it prior to Qutest that was my plan.

But i red interesting writeups about users running their HP straight out of a 2cute.
So i got curious and thought this is simple and free to try. When i got the Qutest and hooked up my HP straight out the RCA's, i immediately heard the difference.

Since Qutest actually has a powerful out stage (the same as a Mojo) it can drive my 300ohm senns to real high levels without distortion.

The only thing i kept thinking was that the voltage power section inside the Qutest was not created to supply this OP stage with enough juice to drive current drawing HP's so the capacitors were not matched for this. (They were chosen to feed a amp with high impendance input)

Thats why i installed full size Elco's parallel right over the voltage feeds of the OP component.

Later i terminated my HP's cable with RCA plugs.

Rob says it himself: any extra component in a audio chain only degrades SQ. Not to mention i also can't get ground loops through a net powered amp.


----------



## arjuna93

Reactcore said:


> But i red interesting writeups about users running their HP straight out of a 2cute.



Will it work? What will be the optimal way to try it with IEMs?


----------



## Reactcore (Nov 29, 2020)

Prior to terminating my HP cable i created first a RCA to jack socket cable.

U should use player software which has good finestep volume control. I use foobar on a compact thinclient PC with foobar remote app on my phone.

With iems u have to be more careful than high impedance cans. They get easy too loud.
My 16ohm earbuds work fine too.


----------



## Hooster

Reactcore said:


> Rob says it himself: any extra component in a audio chain only degrades SQ. Not to mention i also can't get ground loops through a net powered amp.



Rob "himself" is not God and the above statement is not always correct.


----------



## uzi2

Reactcore said:


> Rob says it himself: any extra component in a audio chain only degrades SQ. Not to mention i also can't get ground loops through a net powered amp.





Hooster said:


> Rob "himself" is not God and the above statement is not always correct.



Agree if you read SQ as sound quality as some people prefer a little additional distortion. Disagree if SQ is signal quality as all additional circuitry will degrade this.
The difference being is that sound quality is subjective and involves adding an individuals ears and brain into the mix...


----------



## Hooster

Indeed. In my speaker system I have Western Electric 111c transformers and a tube buffer in my signal chain. Is the SQ with these better than a straight cable? Hell yes. Do the introduce distortion? Of course they do, but I am not a piece of measuring equipment so that is not what I care about. What I care about is engaging, dynamic and listenable sound.


----------



## uzi2

Hooster said:


> Indeed. In my speaker system I have Western Electric 111c transformers and a tube buffer in my signal chain. Is the SQ with these better than a straight cable? Hell yes. Do the introduce distortion? Of course they do, but I am not a piece of measuring equipment so that is not what I care about. What I care about is engaging, dynamic and listenable sound.


Ok, so you interpret SQ as sound quality


----------



## uzi2

Hooster said:


> Rob "himself" is not God and the above statement is not always correct.


To answer your first point - Rob is God in this thread - he is the creator...


----------



## bpcans

uzi2 said:


> To answer your first point - Rob is God in this thread - he is the creator...


LOL uzi2. You got that right. All hail Master Creator Rob Watts!


----------



## Chop-Top

Guess we should all go to integrated amps in lieu of separates for signal and sound quality (Lol)


----------



## The Jester (Nov 30, 2020)

Imagine going into a reasonably sized recording studio and setting up a pair of studio mic’s 2/3 into the room and 2 metres apart, then set up the audience with chairs 1/3 into the room ... then record say a 4 piece pop band and a string quartet, listen for half an hour to each using the best quality analogue and digital recorders ... then move the players out and replace the mic’s with quality full range speakers with quality amplification in the same position as the mic’s and play it all back ... if you had 10 audience members who regularly listened to live un amplified music how many different opinions would you have on sound quality, realism, imaging, depth, air and any other commonly used terms ... I’m guessing a lot closer to 10 than 1 ..
then replace the audience with those that rarely listen to live un amplified music and ask which of the three versions sounded the best with the same criteria ... would all 10 prefer the live performance ?
Edit:
with the DAC’s Rob Watts has designed over decades of engineering and audible improvements all he and other engineers can do is strive for transparency from input to output and put it out there  , what we choose to do with it after that is all personal taste ...
what if Rob was an automotive engineer who designed the best car available at a reasonable price but it didn’t come in the colour you like ?


----------



## Jon L

Nicely done comparison of many DAC's.

*ARES II vs D90 vs Bifrost 2 vs ADI-2 vs Gungnir vs Qutest [Mega DAC Roundup & Comparison]*


----------



## daytrader

Jon L said:


> Nicely done comparison of many DAC's.
> 
> *ARES II vs D90 vs Bifrost 2 vs ADI-2 vs Gungnir vs Qutest [Mega DAC Roundup & Comparison]*



Saw this when it first ran on YouTub, great stuff!


----------



## daytrader

Is anyone running the Qutest with an external BT?  I’m thinking of the ifi specifically.  Just wonder how much sound quality suffers over the air as compared to a hard line connection,  either a USB or other wired type?


----------



## elira

daytrader said:


> Is anyone running the Qutest with an external BT?  I’m thinking of the ifi specifically.  Just wonder how much sound quality suffers over the air as compared to a hard line connection,  either a USB or other wired type?


Bluetooth is lossy, you have to compress/decompress the stream. It should work fine and you might have good enough sound quality, but I wouldn't use a qutest exclusively for that.


----------



## daytrader

elira said:


> Bluetooth is lossy, you have to compress/decompress the stream. It should work fine and you might have good enough sound quality, but I wouldn't use a qutest exclusively for that.


Does Chord get around this with the Hugo 2tt?  Or is the BT pretty much included as a convenience feature?


----------



## arjuna93

daytrader said:


> Is anyone running the Qutest with an external BT?  I’m thinking of the ifi specifically.  Just wonder how much sound quality suffers over the air as compared to a hard line connection,  either a USB or other wired type?



You can use Airport Express with Optical out to Qutest. Supports only CD quality, but Lossless.


----------



## jwbrent

daytrader said:


> Does Chord get around this with the Hugo 2tt?  Or is the BT pretty much included as a convenience feature?



All BT codecs are lossy, but not to the same degree. There’s no way, for instance, running an iFi xCAN for BT with your Qutest that the sound will be comparable, or any other BT transceiver, for that matter. The technology isn’t there yet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if sometime in the future lossless BT becomes a reality.

So, no, the TT2’s built-in BT is not lossless.


----------



## jeremya

@Rob Watts, how tolerant is the 5V power input on the Qutest? I happen to have a 6V regulated supply (Farad Super3) that I use to power another device in my playback chain and I'm wondering if the Qutest would tolerate 6V power input... or if I'd be sending it to the great FPGA pile in the sky just for trying...


----------



## jeremya

Jon L said:


> Nicely done comparison of many DAC's.
> 
> *ARES II vs D90 vs Bifrost 2 vs ADI-2 vs Gungnir vs Qutest [Mega DAC Roundup & Comparison]*




Indeed. Thanks for sharing this!


----------



## Rob Watts

jeremya said:


> @Rob Watts, how tolerant is the 5V power input on the Qutest? I happen to have a 6V regulated supply (Farad Super3) that I use to power another device in my playback chain and I'm wondering if the Qutest would tolerate 6V power input... or if I'd be sending it to the great FPGA pile in the sky just for trying...



You would send it to the great FPGA pile in the sky with 6v... It must be USB voltage compliant, that is 5v +/- 0.25v.


----------



## arjuna93

@Rob Watts Could you please comment on Coaxial, does it make any difference if RCA-terminated cable is used (with an adapter on Chord side) or BNC-terminated (with an adapter on the source side)?


----------



## arjuna93

Rob Watts said:


> On Hugo 2 optical sounds the same as USB - and this is via headphones, so no ground loop from the source, and hence no ground currents. It changes as soon as you ground the connection, which normally happens with Qutest, as you will connect an amp on the outputs. Now to reduce the ground currents (RF noise into the ground plane of the DAC) I use galvanic isolation and RF filters - but it's not possible to totally eliminate the issue. If you use a low power, simple source, then USB sounds the same as optical (particularly with battery powered sources), so use the optical as your benchmark. To do the listening tests correctly you need to disconnect all other sources. Coax has no galvanic isolation, and direct coupling to the grounds, so will always be the brighter sounding input.
> 
> The reason it sounds brighter is RF noise when interfering with analogue creates more noise floor modulation, which makes it sound brighter.



Oh wow. Thank you very much for insightful info. I was planning to get Coax converter to try it, but now feel like I better stay with Optical. Saves me some cash too.


----------



## jeremya

Rob Watts said:


> You would send it to the great FPGA pile in the sky with 6v... It must be USB voltage compliant, that is 5v +/- 0.25v.



Thank you so much for confirming! I had a feeling that would be your answer, but your designs are so robust in general that I wanted to rule out any doubt. =^)


----------



## Rob Watts

arjuna93 said:


> @Rob Watts Could you please comment on Coaxial, does it make any difference if RCA-terminated cable is used (with an adapter on Chord side) or BNC-terminated (with an adapter on the source side)?



It probably won't make any difference at all, but I would have the BNC on the Qutest side as any possible miss-termination will have less of an effect, as any signal reflection would have a smaller impact when closer to the source.


----------



## arjuna93

Rob Watts said:


> It probably won't make any difference at all, but I would have the BNC on the Qutest side as any possible miss-termination will have less of an effect, as any signal reflection would have a smaller impact when closer to the source.



I went through your earlier comments and saw you recommend Optical over Coax.

I am currently using Airport Express to send signal via Optical into my 2Qute. Since I am unsure if using Airport is a good way, I initially thought to get a USB–Coax converter like Aurorasound. However since you say Optical is preferred over Coax, I would rather stay where I am or get USB to Optical converter.


----------



## arjuna93

Ross said:


> But not so fast! I tried a Matrix X-SPDIF 2 which I took from another system which does have optical output, and tried it with a cheapie optical cable. Yes, optical sounds better with the Qutest than coax from either the Matrix or the Singxer, and quite noticeably so.
> 
> Any current recommendations for optical cables?



Audio-Technica AT-SDP2000

Otherwise Airbow, Ortofon or Saec, all got proper glass optical cables.


----------



## HumanMedia

arjuna93 said:


> I went through your earlier comments and saw you recommend Optical over Coax.
> I am currently using Airport Express to send signal via Optical into my 2Qute. Since I am unsure if using Airport is a good way, I initially thought to get a USB–Coax converter like Aurorasound. However since you say Optical is preferred over Coax, I would rather stay where I am or get USB to Optical converter.



Staying optical if at all possible is a very good approach. There is something else to be wary of here - the Airport Express is a wireless router, which by its very nature sprays out as much RFI as it can through the air in order to work. Airborne RFI is something you should keep away from the audio system as much as possible. It even mentions this in the manual for some Chord components. So a longer optical cable would help this, noting that some optical cables will work up to 24-192, some will only work up to 24-96. Search the forums here for what brands people have success with.

There is also something in the back of my mind about the Airport optical out that you should check on. I have a vague memory that it only supports up to 16bit 48khz. It may even downsample (bad) higher res files to this data rate. Fine if all all you are dealing with is 16bit audio but compromised if you play higher resolution.


----------



## arjuna93

HumanMedia said:


> Staying optical if at all possible is a very good approach. There is something else to be wary of here - the Airport Express is a wireless router, which by its very nature sprays out as much RFI as it can through the air in order to work. Airborne RFI is something you should keep away from the audio system as much as possible. It even mentions this in the manual for some Chord components. So a longer optical cable would help this, noting that some optical cables will work up to 24-192, some will only work up to 24-96. Search the forums here for what brands people have success with.
> There is also something in the back of my mind about the Airport optical out that you should check on. I have a vague memory that it only supports up to 16bit 48khz. It may even downsample (bad) higher res files to this data rate. Fine if all all you are dealing with is 16bit audio but compromised if you play higher resolution.



Thank you. I think you are right about 16 bit, but that works for me. Music I listen to is not available in high-res anyway.

I am considering getting Matrix SPDIF converter to bypass a need for Wi-Fi. Will buy it if come across a used one. Topping and Gustard measurements aren't inspiring.


----------



## arjuna93

jwbrent said:


> Question for Qutest users: is there a USB cable you would recommend that can be purchased with a 6” or thereabouts length?
> My Qutest arrives tomorrow, and since it will be located next to my MacBook Air (repurposed as a server), I’d like a short USB cable with audiophile pretensions.



AIM ShieldIO USB


----------



## arjuna93

Arniesb said:


> Absolutely agree. Tried 2qute which have same galvanic isolation as Qutest with simple usb cable then with Wireworld Starlight 7 usb then Wireworld + Ifi nano usb 3.0
> 2qute with simple usb cable is no comparison to Ifi nano usb 3.0 + Wireworld Starlight 7... With just simple cable it sound much less 3rd, much more fatiguing, less lively, less extension in bass and highs. I would imagine Just how much more it can improve with Sotm Usb Ultra...
> Anyone who think that any chord dac is immune to usb problems is delusional... Better use Optical if you want to save money.



I actually wonder why many prefer taking so much pains with USB as opposed to simply using Optical that has zero electrical noise problems.


----------



## technobear

arjuna93 said:


> I actually wonder why many prefer taking so much pains with USB as opposed to simply using Optical that has zero electrical noise problems.


Because a lot of DACs are not immune to the jitter levels that come from poor optical sources.

In the case of Chord DACs, the performance on optical input is exceptionally good.

You will need some treatment of your USB feed to match it. The Qutest has galvanic isolation so that is part of the battle sorted but devices like the iUSB3.0 or iPurifier3 can still help if you are using a PC/laptop/phone/DAP.


----------



## Chop-Top

*This DAC is so damn good! *  *@Rob Watts  you are the man!!*


----------



## triggsviola

I just bought this DAC. It’ll be here next Tuesday. I am currently running an Audio-gd R7 but it’s too big for where I’m going to be living soon. My concern is USB noise. My R7 is quiet. My Modi MB is noisy as heck! So is my Red Dragonfly. My Fostex HP-A3 was quiet. Not sure why this was the case. Any issues with USB being noisy out of a PC with the Qutest?


----------



## schnesim

triggsviola said:


> I just bought this DAC. It’ll be here next Tuesday. I am currently running an Audio-gd R7 but it’s too big for where I’m going to be living soon. My concern is USB noise. My R7 is quiet. My Modi MB is noisy as heck! So is my Red Dragonfly. My Fostex HP-A3 was quiet. Not sure why this was the case. Any issues with USB being noisy out of a PC with the Qutest?



Well the Red and Mimby aren't galvanically isolated, the Qutest is. So at the very least the noise should be considerably lower. And you can also try an ifi iSilencer in case there is noise.


----------



## iulian_sip

Hello, I have a Chord Qutest DAC and a Fiio M11 Pro, I would like to know if I can use a DUAL BNC cable with jack to benefit from 768kHz. 
The cable is the one in the picture below.
Thank you.


----------



## technobear

iulian_sip said:


> Hello, I have a Chord Qutest DAC and a Fiio M11 Pro, I would like to know if I can use a DUAL BNC cable with jack to benefit from 768kHz.
> The cable is the one in the picture below.
> Thank you.


Does the M11 Pro have twin coaxial outputs that function as one at 768kHz?

(I don't think so)


----------



## daytrader

The Qutest is not all about the numbers.  😉


----------



## DomieMic65

Hi to all... is there any comparison in this ultra long thread between Qutest vs Pontus or even Aries II?
Thank you in advance!


----------



## daytrader

DomieMic65 said:


> Hi to all... is there any comparison in this ultra long thread between Qutest vs Pontus or even Aries II?
> Thank you in advance!


Pontus is #1
Ares II and the Qutest are said to be really close. 
All the above have an organic sound, not stringent like Sigma Delta can give you.


----------



## Triode User

daytrader said:


> Pontus is #1
> Ares II and the Qutest are said to be really close.
> All the above have an organic sound, not stringent like Sigma Delta can give you.



it all comes down to personal preference but I did not like the Ares 2 at all compared to the qutest when a friend brought his round to try in my system. He sold the Ares a couple of weeks after he heard the comparison but I still have my Qutest.


----------



## daytrader (Dec 22, 2020)

Triode User said:


> it all comes down to personal preference but I did not like the Ares 2 at all compared to the qutest when a friend brought his round to try in my system. He sold the Ares a couple of weeks after he heard the comparison but I still have my Qutest.


Personal preference, I’ll agree with that. R2Rs sound much different than chip dacs.  I went from a Mojo to Qutest and ended with the Denafrips Ares2 in my Stax setup.  Liked it so much so, I’m preordering the Pontus, currently on back order, for my home system.  The price to performance ratio is just nuts on these pieces based on my experience with the Ares2 and reviews on the other pieces in the line up.  Would have loved going even higher up the chain, sure to be even happier, but I won’t spend anymore than what the Pontus comes in at for digital conversion pieces, as they tend to become obsolete the fastest of all audio gear.


----------



## Reactcore

Just a note to fellow Qutest owners.. if u haven't auditioned it with an Mscaler.. and can aquire the means and will to fund one.. go and try this combo. Its a game changer. 

I can truly recommend it after becoming a owner myself.


----------



## daytrader

Reactcore said:


> Just a note to fellow Qutest owners.. if u haven't auditioned it with an Mscaler.. and can aquire the means and will to fund one.. go and try this combo. Its a game changer.
> 
> I can truly recommend it after becoming a owner myself.


So it takes the Mscaler with the Qutest to really shine?  $4800 + $1700 = $6500, game change?  I certainly would hope so.  Add in headphones of the same quality level and you’re over $10K, just for a headset audio!  So yes, having the means would be a wonderful thing indeed! 🎧


----------



## Reactcore

daytrader said:


> So yes, having the means would be a wonderful thing indeed! 🎧



I must agree its cosly. I started with a AK120 dap driving my 300 ohm HD800 which i SD modded. And holded on to this for 4 years even finding its dual Wolfson setup sounding better than its AK successors. Later i got myself a Mojo cause i heard what it does with live instruments in music.. 

But i still kept grabbing my AK cause to my ears it had more open clear soundstage. This was due to the high roll off filter which is fixed in Mojo.
I heard the H2 with selectable filters but it was too expensive to justify. 

1 year later the Qutest came for half the price and i bought one 2nd hand for €1k
to pair it with a 2nd hand Questyle CMA400 for €400 which i modded to take analog input into the amp section.

But after reading users having succes with driving their HP straight out the RCA's i tried and was blown by the clarity.
I even modded my Qutest by placing low Z buffer caps on the internal voltage feed to the final OP stage.

Now i saw Qutest owners trading in for a TT2 but doubting a Mscaler.. and as attractive i found it.. i went the scaler way. 

All i say is i think i made the right choice with the Ms to get to hear true Chord lifelike sound. But for the cheapest price possible, which is still heavy on my wallet but for me worth every penny.


----------



## daytrader (Dec 27, 2020)

Reactcore said:


> All i say is i think i made the right choice with the Ms to get to hear true Chord lifelike sound. But for the cheapest price possible, which is still heavy on my wallet but for me worth every penny.


Some say the TT2 is to analytical, having never heard one so I can’t say it for sure is, but the Qutest certainly was not to my ears though like I said i went to a R2R design to get what I needed.  It’s just a shame one has to add that kind of money, in the retail market, to get something ”true Chord lifelike”.   But with careful buying on the used market you've seemed to get to an end game set up, that sounds to be worthy of the money and time you spent getting there and has seemingly  brought you to where you needed to be.  Efforts pay off!  Cheers...🎧


----------



## nwavesailor

daytrader said:


> Some say the TT2 is to analytical, having never heard one so I can’t say it for sure is, but the Qutest certainly was not to my ears though like I said i went to a R2R design to get what I needed.



I would say the TT2 is more revealing than the Qutest but analytical is not a word I would use, at least not when paired with my Empy's or VO.


----------



## Reactcore (Dec 27, 2020)

nwavesailor said:


> I would say the TT2 is more revealing than the Qutest but analytical is not a word I would use, at least not when paired with my Empy's or VO.



I listened to TT2 too and if i use a HP amp with Qutest i agree TT is more revealing.. but without amp i can't tell the difference that easy anymore.

A big strenght of TT is having as short as possible signal path through the analog output circuitry with most shaping filters in the digital domain, no intelink cables to a amp or RF/ground issues on the output side. Keeping the analog chain 'simple'.

I've heard the H2 several times but found it a bit too sharp (dry) somehow where Qutest has a tad fuller sound. Which is just the sweet spot for me.

Now with the HMs i entered a whole new level of pure musical bliss..
I understand truly what Rob's quest for persuing accurate timing was all about and how the results even amazed him too. As he stated in these forums.

I'm wholefully grateful to him.. and the Chord team for giving him the room to realise his theories.


----------



## GreenBow (Dec 30, 2020)

Darko compared the *Qutest* with the *RME ADI-2 DAC FS.*

He said:

the Qutest is better at the illusionary depth of soundstage.
the RME DAC with an off the shelf chip gets to leading edges of sounds better.

RME's ADI-2 DAC FS is *the* DAC to beat at €1K - YouTube

The only aspect that I can see that the RME has, is a S/N ratio equal to the Qutest. Plus it will be as good as the  AKM AK4493 can be implemented at this price point of DAC. However it could not possibly equal the Qutest in terms of detail retrieval; could it? As far as I can see though, all DACs that use an FPGA are the best in class.

Calling the Qutest soundstage depth 'illusionary', speaks volumes. To me, it's the detail that Chord give digital music that creates the soundstage. (Plus the soundstage detail to very edges.) Since having the right detail retrieval in music, gives music the directional cues.

As far as I know, but I might very well be wrong. It's possible to extend/fake soundstage width, but not depth.

Granted the AKM AK4493 will be a great chip. However I am guessing Darko has mistaken a less detailed leading edge sound, as a thicker leading edge sound. Maybe it's just a more fuller sounding DAC also, that gives leading edges more meat. I still think the Qutest will hit the leading more quickly though. As just going by numbers its transients must be faster.

In the interests of fairness though - I have not heard the RME DAC. An open mind then.


----------



## Triode User

GreenBow said:


> In the interests of fairness though - I have not heard the RME DAC. An open mind then.



I have owned the RME dac and was able to compare to a Qutest over several months.  I found it to have a fatiguing harshness on some music that was only cured by selecting a filter with top end roll off in the audible spectrum. Also, despite statements to the contrary from the designer, the RME did sound better in that area with a good LPS power supply. I sold the RME and kept the Qutest.


----------



## strider1007 (Dec 30, 2020)

Exciting times.. After a few months of reading and visiting forums I finally decided on the Qutest. Supposed to be arriving today.  

Great way to end a crappy year !

And there it is !


----------



## GreenBow

Triode User said:


> I have owned the RME dac and was able to compare to a Qutest over several months.  I found it to have a fatiguing harshness on some music that was only cured by selecting a filter with top end roll off in the audible spectrum. Also, despite statements to the contrary from the designer, the RME did sound better in that area with a good LPS power supply. I sold the RME and kept the Qutest.



Now you mention it, I think I remember you saying that before. Thanks for your thoughts.

(If I were looking at that price point, and not buying Chord at all. I think I would buy the Audiolab M-DAC+. ... Bargains to be had on that DAC.)


----------



## strider1007 (Dec 30, 2020)

OK, first impressions...

Compaired to the Cambridge Dacmagic 100 the Qutest is just in another league...

I am just letting it work, whether it's PC-flac or just TV from my LGC9 via optical..  Everything I hear so far is better, simply better..
Already sure I'm hearing more detail, and hearing detail better... And it looks Qute...


----------



## Simple Man

I had doubts between the RME and Qutest. Listened to them both. Bought the Qutest but I rememberd there was 'more music' out of it. Also finer details.
But....make sure to use the right cables! I've tried a few, as interlink, and came out with Cristal Cable. Siltecht was also very nice.


----------



## Simple Man

strider1007 said:


> OK, first impressions...
> 
> Compaired to the Cambridge Dacmagic 100 the Qutest is just in another league...
> 
> ...



Nice set up, but Ikea plankjes?


----------



## strider1007

Simple Man said:


> Nice set up, but Ikea plankjes?


The black one in front of it is actually a Target Audio rack.. But yeah.. IKEA it is.. I am going to use some dampening stuff, but it is the most acceptable way to go in my current set-up..

Qutest still sounds Qute on IKEA, though.. And with this IKEA-rack you don't need the 'slllleutelllltje'...


----------



## Reactcore

strider1007 said:


> OK, first impressions...
> 
> Compaired to the Cambridge Dacmagic 100 the Qutest is just in another league...
> 
> ...


Nice setup!
I almost ordered a Vali2 just to taste tube sound.. never came to it though.

Be sure to try drive your HP direct out of the RCA's. Use software volume adjustment. U can hear its small signal accuracy giving dynamics.


----------



## strider1007

Reactcore said:


> Be sure to try drive your HP direct out of the RCA's. Use software volume adjustment. U can hear its small signal accuracy giving dynamics.



Tricky, I am using two Audioquest RCA splitter-cables. I use the Darkvoice for HP-listening, but also a Schiit Magnius for my powered Dynaudio monitors.. So listening directly to RCA would mean some custom cables and no Darkvoice/Magnius, right?


----------



## Reactcore

strider1007 said:


> So listening directly to RCA would mean some custom cables and no Darkvoice/Magnius, right?



Yep i made a simple RCA to Jack socket cable..



Later i made a headphone cable with RCA plugs on the end.


----------



## hikaru12

Does anyone have a good amp recommendation to preserve and compliment the Qutests strengths? (Detail while retaining naturalness). I have the LP and am very happy with it but I think it works best as balanced and going SE to Balanced is going to limit it somewhat.


----------



## daytrader

hikaru12 said:


> Does anyone have a good amp recommendation to preserve and compliment the Qutests strengths? (Detail while retaining naturalness). I have the LP and am very happy with it but I think it works best as balanced and going SE to Balanced is going to limit it somewhat.


----------



## daredevil_kk

hikaru12 said:


> Does anyone have a good amp recommendation to preserve and compliment the Qutests strengths? (Detail while retaining naturalness). I have the LP and am very happy with it but I think it works best as balanced and going SE to Balanced is going to limit it somewhat.


I would go for a Schiit Asgard 3.


----------



## hikaru12

bpcans said:


> Just bought a new Chord Qutest DAC last week and I absolutely love it! It’s on the chain going from my MacBook Pro to my WOO Audio WA6 amp and then out to my Grado GS3000e headphones. The Audioquest Earth RCA interconnects and an Audioquest Diamond USB work perfectly in this setup.



How do you like this setup? I'm having a hard time trying to find which amp to pair this with. I'm getting a 789 to tide me over but I can't find anything around the <$2k market thats worth it given limited desk space. I have a separate audio rack but its taking too much space in my room hence why the Qutest would fit perfect. A single solution like the WA6 would work well.


----------



## nwavesailor

hikaru12 said:


> Does anyone have a good amp recommendation to preserve and compliment the Qutests strengths? (Detail while retaining naturalness). I have the LP and am very happy with it but I think it works best as balanced and going SE to Balanced is going to limit it somewhat.


I had used a Qutest and LP and found it a very nice pairing with VO and Empy's. I now use a Pendant and Qutest while my TT2 is off for a repair. I have not used my LP since buying the Pendant. 

Getting a HM susvana today and will try the Pendant and also the LP with it's greater power paired with this hp.
Yes, the Pendant it is SE.


----------



## bpcans

hikaru12 said:


> How do you like this setup? I'm having a hard time trying to find which amp to pair this with. I'm getting a 789 to tide me over but I can't find anything around the <$2k market thats worth it given limited desk space. I have a separate audio rack but its taking too much space in my room hence why the Qutest would fit perfect. A single solution like the WA6 would work well.


hikaru12, in a short period of time since I posted that comment, I’ve traded the Qutest for a TT2, the Grado 3000e’s for some Focal Utopias, the AQ Earth RCA’s for Earth XLR’s, and upgraded my amp from the WA6 to a Woo WA22. This hobby is sneaky that way. 😆 For a desktop system I can’t think of a better pairing than a Chord Qutest dac and the Woo WA6 hp amplifier as a great place to start.


----------



## SaddleSC

Hey guys...I have a quick question. My new Qutest will be delivered on Monday and I have been perusing the owner's manual PDF. I am a bit confused about the Output Voltage setting. The Qutest offers the option of 1V, 2V or 3V. What setting should I use if I am using this strictly as a headphone DAC and will be running the output into a Monolith THX 887 or a Violectric V281? What is the purpose of the other settings? Thanks so much!


----------



## moemoney

SaddleSC said:


> Hey guys...I have a quick question. My new Qutest will be delivered on Monday and I have been perusing the owner's manual PDF. I am a bit confused about the Output Voltage setting. The Qutest offers the option of 1V, 2V or 3V. What setting should I use if I am using this strictly as a headphone DAC and will be running the output into a Monolith THX 887 or a Violectric V281? What is the purpose of the other settings? Thanks so much!


I used 2v forgot the reason why but that work for me


----------



## uzi2

SaddleSC said:


> Hey guys...I have a quick question. My new Qutest will be delivered on Monday and I have been perusing the owner's manual PDF. I am a bit confused about the Output Voltage setting. The Qutest offers the option of 1V, 2V or 3V. What setting should I use if I am using this strictly as a headphone DAC and will be running the output into a Monolith THX 887 or a Violectric V281? What is the purpose of the other settings? Thanks so much!


It is to match the input requirement of the amp. Use the highest setting that does not overload the amp to minimise noise.


----------



## SaddleSC (Jan 9, 2021)

uzi2 said:


> It is to match the input requirement of the amp. Use the highest setting that does not overload the amp to minimise noise.


Thanks for the reply...would I find this info be found in the owner's manual? I have a Violectric V281 and a Monolith THX 887. Would you happen to know the input requirement of either of those? 

Here is a link to the owner's manual for the V281 and I have no idea where the input requirement is listed. Any help would be greatly appreciated...thanks!

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/800254/Violectric-Hpa-V281.html?page=22#manual


----------



## uzi2

SaddleSC said:


> Thanks for the reply...would I find this info be found in the owner's manual? I have a Violectric V281 and a Monolith THX 887. Would you happen to know the input requirement of either of those?
> 
> Here is a link to the owner's manual for the V281 and I have no idea where the input requirement is listed. Any help would be greatly appreciated...thanks!
> 
> https://www.manualslib.com/manual/800254/Violectric-Hpa-V281.html?page=22#manual


I looked at the specifications and it has a heading "Max input voltage" but it does not specify a voltage.
Your ears will tell you... If 3v does not clip, it is the way to go.


----------



## miketlse

SaddleSC said:


> Thanks for the reply...would I find this info be found in the owner's manual? I have a Violectric V281 and a Monolith THX 887. Would you happen to know the input requirement of either of those?
> 
> Here is a link to the owner's manual for the V281 and I have no idea where the input requirement is listed. Any help would be greatly appreciated...thanks!
> 
> https://www.manualslib.com/manual/800254/Violectric-Hpa-V281.html?page=22#manual


The user manuals for amplifiers are often vague or completely blank, regarding the topic of input voltage sensitivity.
If that is the case for your amp, then the best approach/logic to follow is:

The introduction of CD players, resulted in the de-facto standard for amplifier input sensitivity becoming 2V
If your Qutest set at 2V, but still produces input clipping in your amplifier, then try 1V.
This involves an element of trial and error, but will be worth it, for the end result.


----------



## SaddleSC

uzi2 said:


> I looked at the specifications and it has a heading "Max input voltage" but it does not specify a voltage.
> Your ears will tell you... If 3v does not clip, it is the way to go.



Thanks for looking into it for me...glad I wasn't just looking in the wrong place!



miketlse said:


> The user manuals for amplifiers are often vague or completely blank, regarding the topic of input voltage sensitivity.
> If that is the case for your amp, then the best approach/logic to follow is:
> 
> The introduction of CD players, resulted in the de-facto standard for amplifier input sensitivity becoming 2V
> ...



Fantastic...thanks so much for this reply...I will start at 2V and go from there.
I really appreciate your help!


----------



## daytrader

uzi2 said:


> It is to match the input requirement of the amp. Use the highest setting that does not overload the amp to minimise noise.


I though in general the lowest V setting, that still gives you good volume range, is the quietest?  I could be wrong or just misread your answer?


----------



## uzi2

daytrader said:


> I though in general the lowest V setting, that still gives you good volume range, is the quietest?  I could be wrong or just misread your answer?


Signal to noise ratio will be best on the highest input that does not cause clipping.


----------



## NehPets

hikaru12 said:


> How do you like this setup? I'm having a hard time trying to find which amp to pair this with. I'm getting a 789 to tide me over but I can't find anything around the <$2k market thats worth it given limited desk space. I have a separate audio rack but its taking too much space in my room hence why the Qutest would fit perfect. A single solution like the WA6 would work well.


Bakoon HPA-01 - $1795


----------



## blueninjasix

With a passive preamplifier (Khozmo) I use 3v to give it a kick up the arse. With an active preamp (liquid spark) I use the regulation 2v. And when I do direct for Qutest into power amps, I use 1v in order that I can keep the computer music player (foobar in Windows) or HQPlayer (in Linux) at the highest possible volume level (minimum attenuation), thus maintains the closest to bit perfect as possible.


----------



## hikaru12

bpcans said:


> hikaru12, in a short period of time since I posted that comment, I’ve traded the Qutest for a TT2, the Grado 3000e’s for some Focal Utopias, the AQ Earth RCA’s for Earth XLR’s, and upgraded my amp from the WA6 to a Woo WA22. This hobby is sneaky that way. 😆 For a desktop system I can’t think of a better pairing than a Chord Qutest dac and the Woo WA6 hp amplifier as a great place to start.



Haha I know what you mean. I can’t count the amount of times I’ve had to change my signature either. Thanks for your input.


----------



## DomieMic65

It's a huge thread and I haven't read much of it yet but I can't resist from asking my question.
How do Qutest and RME ADI-2 DAC FS compare as DACs?
Are there any comparisons in this thread?
(Yes I've seen the Darko review 🙂 )

Thanks!!!


----------



## daytrader

DomieMic65 said:


> It's a huge thread and I haven't read much of it yet but I can't resist from asking my question.
> How do Qutest and RME ADI-2 DAC FS compare as DACs?
> Are there any comparisons in this thread?
> (Yes I've seen the Darko review 🙂 )
> ...


It pretty much says it all.  Now go out and buy one!  😉


----------



## SaddleSC

DomieMic65 said:


> It's a huge thread and I haven't read much of it yet but I can't resist from asking my question.
> How do Qutest and RME ADI-2 DAC FS compare as DACs?
> Are there any comparisons in this thread?
> (Yes I've seen the Darko review 🙂 )
> ...



I will hopefully be able to shed some light in this in a couple days. My RME arrived on Friday and my Qutest arrives tomorrow fingers crossed


----------



## DomieMic65

daytrader said:


> It pretty much says it all.  Now go out and buy one!  😉


... What do you mean??😂


SaddleSC said:


> I will hopefully be able to shed some light in this in a couple days. My RME arrived on Friday and my Qutest arrives tomorrow fingers crossed


Wow... You are a lucky man..


----------



## GreenBow

DomieMic65 said:


> It's a huge thread and I haven't read much of it yet but I can't resist from asking my question.
> How do Qutest and RME ADI-2 DAC FS compare as DACs?
> Are there any comparisons in this thread?
> (Yes I've seen the Darko review 🙂 )
> ...



DAC Comparison: Chord Qutest vs RME ADI-2 DAC FS - YouTube


----------



## DomieMic65

GreenBow said:


> DAC Comparison: Chord Qutest vs RME ADI-2 DAC FS - YouTube


Seen that too!
Thanks!


----------



## GreenBow (Jan 12, 2021)

Unless you need the headphone port, the Qutest is the better DAC. I don't care what Darko said. .... I don't understand how you're going to get a better DAC with an off the shelf chip. Vs a Chord DAC.

The fact that Darko said Qutest soundstage depth Qutest is illusionary. I don't even understand what that is supposed to mean. It sounds like he doesn't understand some of the basics. Considering his kit, I don't understand where he's at.

He did another video that struck me as odd on a couple of points. His vid about 10 things from 2020 I think it was. Or 10 things about audio equipment.


----------



## GreenBow

DomieMic65 said:


> Are there any comparisons in this thread?



Do you mean you didn't search the thread?


----------



## The Jester

Too many comparisons out there already, you need to sort the reviewer based on their opinions of various equipment reviews and how well they match your own experiences, for instance if you read a headphone comparison and personally prefer the exact opposite to the reviewer then why read a DAC or any other component from the same reviewer, nobody is right or wrong, just different opinions,
in the end nothing beats hearing something for yourself, if you prefer A over B then fine, that’s your choice.


----------



## JaquesGelee

Hey,

which compact Amp ist the "best" choice for the qutest?


----------



## strider1007

JaquesGelee said:


> Hey,
> 
> which compact Amp ist the "best" choice for the qutest?


What do you want to "drive" ?


----------



## miketlse (Jan 15, 2021)

Here is a list of Qutest posts using the search term 'amp'.
Should fill your weekend with suggestions to follow-up.


----------



## Stereo Skunk

JaquesGelee said:


> Hey,
> 
> which compact Amp ist the "best" choice for the qutest?



Despite the noise about the Topping L30, I found it to sound wonderfully smooth and clear. Awesome little amp.


----------



## Lolito

Will Chord release a newer and cheaper dac, or lower Qutest price, now that denafrips offers sucha much better dac like the ARES 2 for almost half the price of the Quetest?


----------



## HumanMedia (Jan 17, 2021)

Dont know about the Ares 2 being better, but Chord usually announce new products around now. An updated Qutest would be nice...


----------



## The Jester

Already is a Qutest update ...
it’s called MScaler .... 😃


----------



## Triode User

Lolito said:


> Will Chord release a newer and cheaper dac, or lower Qutest price, now that denafrips offers sucha much better dac like the ARES 2 for almost half the price of the Quetest?



Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I could not bear to have the Ares 2 in my Qutest system when it was loaned to me by a friend. The friend sold the Ares 2 soon after hearing it compared to the Quest at my house . . . .


----------



## HumanMedia (Jan 17, 2021)

The Jester said:


> Already is a Qutest update ...
> it’s called MScaler .... 😃



Yeah I have that upgrade already 🙂
All I want from a QutestPlus is the same Qutest form factor and connections, same number of taps, but a much better WTA2 stage and standard robust barrel style 12v DC power connection.

Then it would make a better pairing with the MScaler. Seems a waste to get a TT2 just for its WTA2 stage and never use its taps and all of those inputs which the MScaler replaces...


----------



## The Jester

You get a headphone out with the TT2 as well ? ..
seriously though I like Chord’s approach, The R&D costs go into the high end products like Dave plus Blue Mk2 ...
don’t need a CD drive ? Dave plus MScaler ..
not overly endowed with $$ TT2 with an MScaler as an upgrade path..
less endowed still but just want a “no frills” DAC with that Chord sound ? Qutest with an MScaler upgrade path ..
“Trickle down” technology, once you realise that for the cost of a Qutest you get, depending on opinion, xx% sound of the Dave it‘s no longer expensive,
it’s a bargain..


----------



## Christer (Jan 18, 2021)

HumanMedia said:


> Yeah I have that upgrade already 🙂
> All I want from a QutestPlus is the same Qutest form factor and connections, same number of taps, but a much better WTA2 stage and standard robust barrel style 12v DC power connection.
> 
> Then it would make a better pairing with the MScaler. Seems a waste to get a TT2 just for its WTA2 stage and never use its taps and all of those inputs which the MScaler replaces...


I wouldn´t mind  the same as you but I am pretty sure it won´t happen.
Chord wants to sell you TT2 and have in the past shown little  or no interest in providing  any freebies.

During my direct A/B comparisons via good headphones  like HD 800, HEKV2, Utopia and Susvara beween TT2/HMS and Qutest/HMS with  high quaility headphone amps for Qutest I came to the conclusion that the huge price  difference involved was simply not justified for me since I already have several high quality headphone amps.

Imho Qutest/HMS and in my case Wave Storm or Stream is already very good, but ideally I would like  to have DAVE/HMS  or better SQ with the same form factor and  price as Qutest /HMS.
To me TT2 is not really a dac I´d buy now unless I get one VERY cheaply.
And on its own I wouldn´t  buy it at all.
Like with  all Chord Dacs and I´ve said so repeatedly, HMS is absolutely essential!
Or even Dave on its own,which is getting old and is still overpriced, again imho.

Tempt me with 40 elements and say 2 M taps and SQ without even a trace of digital.

As close as technically possible transparency with acoustic  music material is the ultimate goal for me.

Back on Qutest,yes the flimsy little usb power connection is very irritating and  a real pain while travelling with it and having to unplug it regularly.
Only one set of RCA out is cheeky to say the least.My old Benchmark DAC 2 HGC has  got no less than 5 sets of RCA connections plus  one balanced, and cost roughly the same as my Qutest.
OK Qutest/HMS is  a better dac combo 
But unless  my memory fails me,the headphone amp in it has got better SNR than the one in  TT2?
PS. After this long rant I have to admit I am quite happy with my Qutest/HMS both via headphones and  via my big speaker based HIFI system.
Cheers CC


----------



## stretchneck (Jan 22, 2021)

I tried a DAVE, technically perfect, but I didn't like it as the soundstage was way too set back for my liking.  I now have the qutest.  Works better for me in the fact that everything is somewhat more upfront and vocals have presence (slightly more forward?).

I do find it a more darker sounding DAC than the DAVE though, the highs are also somewhat recessed, and this decreases it's realism IMO.  I use the incisive neutral filter and Oyaide Tunami Terzo RR v2  and Sablon 2020 USB.

I previously found the tonal balance of the Yggy about perfect, but the noise floor of that DAC was not good enough for me.

Any tips on how to tune the qutest to my taste - upsampling, use spdif instead of USB, external linear power supply?  Any thoughts?


----------



## dac64

stretchneck said:


> Any tips on how to tune the qutest to my taste - upsampling, use spdif instead of USB, external linear power supply?  Any thoughts?



home trial an used HMS, if you can.


----------



## HumanMedia (Jan 23, 2021)

stretchneck said:


> Any tips on how to tune the qutest to my taste - upsampling, use spdif instead of USB, external linear power supply?  Any thoughts?


Sablon USB is perfect.
A really good power supply improves.

However the revelation I have had this year is that player/streamer and also he network improvements upstream from the player have a profound effect on the sound.
Look into linear supplies on all network devices and something like the Uptone EtherRegen for Ethernet connections and look into an optical ethernet connection to your player streamer.


----------



## Audioraider (Jan 24, 2021)

Yesterday I received the Sbooster with the MKII ultra adapter for my Qutest. After reading both this thread and the LPS thread for the Qutest I have to say that I’m a little confused. I was under the impression that this would be a minor upgrade at best. The differences I am hearing are substantial. As with most power supply upgrades the improvements are not in one particular area but across-the-board. Keep In mind that I’m using a highly resolving headphone system. Eddie Current ZDS OTL with ZMF Vérité closed headphones, WyWire platinum headphone cable along with acoustics zen silver reference II IC cables, with a less resolving system the results may not be as substantial. As I said, the improvements are across-the-board with an improvement in soundstage depth, separation and a noticeable improvement in the high frequency extension. The most dramatic change is in the bass. I would not say more bass but clearly better controlled and defined. The only complaint I had about my system was that on certain recordings the bass could get a little loose and that is no longer the case with the Sbooster. Purchasing this from upscale audio they let me know that Chord has contacted them and told them that they do not recommend using the Sbooster with a Qutest. I am very curious as to why? I know Rob reads this thread so maybe he can answer directly, maybe there is a technical reason but regarding sound quality the improvement is substantial and dramatic in my system.


----------



## Rob Watts

Audioraider said:


> Yesterday I received the Sbooster with the MKII ultra adapter for my Qutest. After reading both this thread and the LPS thread for the Qutest I have to say that I’m a little confused. I was under the impression that this would be a minor upgrade at best. The differences I am hearing are substantial. As with most power supply upgrades the improvements are not in one particular area but across-the-board. Keep In mind that I’m using a highly resolving headphone system. Eddie Current ZDS OTL with ZMF Vérité closed headphones, WyWire platinum headphone cable along with acoustics zen silver reference II IC cables, with a less resolving system the results may not be as substantial. As I said, the improvements are across-the-board with an improvement in soundstage depth, separation and a noticeable improvement in the high frequency extension. The most dramatic change is in the bass. I would not say more bass but clearly better controlled and defined. The only complaint I had about my system was that on certain recordings the bass could get a little loose and that is no longer the case with the Sbooster. Purchasing this from upscale audio they let me know that Chord has contacted them and told them that they do not recommend using the Sbooster with a Qutest. I am very curious as to why? I know Rob reads this thread so maybe he can answer directly, maybe there is a technical reason but regarding sound quality the improvement is substantial and dramatic in my system.



I am afraid you are not going to like my reply! You say "noticeable improvement in the high frequency extension" and "bass could get a little loose and that is no longer the case with the Sbooster" are classic examples of the degradation induced by more noise floor modulation. And you are getting more noise floor modulation because of more RF noise coming into Qutest. When you reduce RF noise (which oddly happens with SMPS as they have RF filters built into the IP and OP), bass sounds softer and fatter; the treble sounds warmer and less extended. This is due to the reduction in noise floor modulation, which artificially spices the sound up, as a bright sound (noise) is being added in sympathy with the music. But if you listen more carefully to an RF noisy supply, you will notice that things sound a tad louder, and that instruments are not as separate and tangible. Also, listening fatigue will start earlier than before and musicality (that is the ability to get emotional to the music) has been seriously degraded.


----------



## Arniesb

Rob Watts said:


> I am afraid you are not going to like my reply! You say "noticeable improvement in the high frequency extension" and "bass could get a little loose and that is no longer the case with the Sbooster" are classic examples of the degradation induced by more noise floor modulation. And you are getting more noise floor modulation because of more RF noise coming into Qutest. When you reduce RF noise (which oddly happens with SMPS as they have RF filters built into the IP and OP), bass sounds softer and fatter; the treble sounds warmer and less extended. This is due to the reduction in noise floor modulation, which artificially spices the sound up, as a bright sound (noise) is being added in sympathy with the music. But if you listen more carefully to an RF noisy supply, you will notice that things sound a tad louder, and that instruments are not as separate and tangible. Also, listening fatigue will start earlier than before and musicality (that is the ability to get emotional to the music) has been seriously degraded.


Sir, you said that linear power supplies are more noisy, but from what i see that top measuring dacs have linear power supplies like Matrix X sabre pro, Topping d90, mola mola and more.
Maybe its more of a problem with big amplifiers where they need a lot of gain?
Thank you.


----------



## stretchneck

Rob Watts said:


> I am afraid you are not going to like my reply! You say "noticeable improvement in the high frequency extension" and "bass could get a little loose and that is no longer the case with the Sbooster" are classic examples of the degradation induced by more noise floor modulation. And you are getting more noise floor modulation because of more RF noise coming into Qutest. When you reduce RF noise (which oddly happens with SMPS as they have RF filters built into the IP and OP), bass sounds softer and fatter; the treble sounds warmer and less extended. This is due to the reduction in noise floor modulation, which artificially spices the sound up, as a bright sound (noise) is being added in sympathy with the music. But if you listen more carefully to an RF noisy supply, you will notice that things sound a tad louder, and that instruments are not as separate and tangible. Also, listening fatigue will start earlier than before and musicality (that is the ability to get emotional to the music) has been seriously degraded.



I think this gives a useful explanation of why "the treble sounds warmer and less extended".  Subjectively I can well believe this and why the qutest (to my ears) is perhaps a bit darker sounding compared some other DACs.  But, the Chord DAVE doesn't have the same dark signature (it doesn't sound as warm as the qutest), and it does have nicely extended & smooth treble... yet it's noise modulation floor is better than the qutest.  I do prefer the signature of the DAVE, but the distant/recessed soundstage just didn't work for me, I like vocals slightly more upfront like on the qutest (and original Hugo TT which I enjoyed).

I notice that the darkness with the qutest eases off somewhat it you use 3v output, better SNR ratio perhaps at the higher voltage.  Perhaps the higher voltage output of the DAVE also helps with it's signature.


----------



## emilsoft

stretchneck said:


> I think this gives a useful explanation of why "the treble sounds warmer and less extended".  Subjectively I can well believe this and why the qutest (to my ears) is perhaps a bit darker sounding compared some other DACs.  But, the Chord DAVE doesn't have the same dark signature (it doesn't sound as warm as the qutest), and it does have nicely extended & smooth treble... yet it's noise modulation floor is better than the qutest.  I do prefer the signature of the DAVE, but the distant/recessed soundstage just didn't work for me, I like vocals slightly more upfront like on the qutest (and original Hugo TT which I enjoyed).
> 
> I notice that the darkness with the qutest eases off somewhat it you use 3v output, better SNR ratio perhaps at the higher voltage.  Perhaps the higher voltage output of the DAVE also helps with it's signature.



I do notice with 3v out the mids are more forward but the bass doesn't have the same impact..


----------



## stretchneck

emilsoft said:


> I do notice with 3v out the mids are more forward but the bass doesn't have the same impact..


You may be right - I'll have a listen later.


----------



## emilsoft (Jan 25, 2021)

I've been comparing my Apogee Element DAC out with the Qutest. Both DACs using optical in > Woo WA8 > HS800S. My preference is warm and dynamic/muscular sound, but still clear with good technicalities.

Both these DACs compete in the same category, both are neutral and offer a little organic touch to make digital audio more agreeable. There are some differences though:
the Apogee sounds more muscular with more explosive transients, more forward/direct mids and inner warmth but still retains razor like precision for instrument placement and black background allowing each sound to take it's own spotlight and be easily discerned and localised.. The Qutest sounds a little more playful, throwing a wall of detail at me, also softened a little making it more palatable vs other D/S dacs.. it's playfulness derives from it's nice sub bass, details, slight coloration and inner glow it brings to the sound stage.. it's not as serious sounding as the Element (details can be a little more jumpy/difficult to place even if there is a lot of them) -  I think it's a matter of preference, both are high performers; the Element can transport you to the artist's studio/concert more quickly and impress with more explosive transients and it's rock solid technicalities and tighter/denser bass and instrument placement, but the Qutest can be playful, offer more glow/embellishment and maybe be more comfortable over long listening sessions as it's mids and transients are not so direct. Both DACs are very resolving but still neutralish-smooth and natural, unlike many other harsher sounding delta sigma DACs.

Key difference is that the Element needs Apple mac to be controlled, and it's less  than half the price of the Qutest, plus it's an all in one with excellent current drive headphone amp (drives the HD800s nicely). I like the Qutest, I think it offers it's own thing, but I feel it should cost half the price - competition is too tough now and something like the Element can blow your socks much like the Qutest, maybe even more so if you crave more of an direct-studio like performance (key highlight is even though the Element is a studio interface, it does not sound like a typical dry and clinical studio gear, it sounds quite organic whilst retaining studio worthy sensibilities).

I'm burning in the Qutest now, over time I hope I can appreciate it's qualities even more, so the gap between it and the Element increase. Not sure I want to go down the road of upgrading the power supply - last thing I want is more treble or hardness introduced to the sound.. I'm with Rob Watts on this - more treble/excitement does not mean it's better at all for me - I prefer quiet confidence derived from inner warmth and resolution.


----------



## emilsoft

Rob Watts said:


> I am afraid you are not going to like my reply! You say "noticeable improvement in the high frequency extension" and "bass could get a little loose and that is no longer the case with the Sbooster" are classic examples of the degradation induced by more noise floor modulation. And you are getting more noise floor modulation because of more RF noise coming into Qutest. When you reduce RF noise (which oddly happens with SMPS as they have RF filters built into the IP and OP), bass sounds softer and fatter; the treble sounds warmer and less extended. This is due to the reduction in noise floor modulation, which artificially spices the sound up, as a bright sound (noise) is being added in sympathy with the music. But if you listen more carefully to an RF noisy supply, you will notice that things sound a tad louder, and that instruments are not as separate and tangible. Also, listening fatigue will start earlier than before and musicality (that is the ability to get emotional to the music) has been seriously degraded.



I agree with this statement - whenever things sound brighter/more exciting I know now that it's not necessarily a good thing. I do find that using a nice battery pack for USB power  to the Qutest does help - i notice less confusion, bit less treble and listening fatigue.


----------



## stretchneck

Element of system matching involved as well, some may already perceive my system as already sounding somewhat dark.


----------



## emilsoft

stretchneck said:


> Element of system matching involved as well, some may already perceive my system as already sounding somewhat dark.



That's true, but if you system match to make the DAC sounding brighter because the system is darker you might also bring additional unwanted side effects, like congestion/grain and general decrease in hi fidelity. It's a tricky thing.. for example my Woo WA8 Sabre dac is quite sharp but coupled with the warm tubes it has good synergy - using a usb decrapifier ifi iUSB 3 and high quality digital source increase the fidelity significantly making the DAC sound grander, more organic and well defined, a lot less digital sounding, but because it makes it much warmer the voicing is off with the tubes - but I still prefer it this way even with the added warmth because I gain so much more so it's worth the sacrifice


----------



## alxw0w

emilsoft said:


> I agree with this statement - whenever things sound brighter/more exciting I know now that it's not necessarily a good thing. I do find that using a nice battery pack for USB power  to the Qutest does help - i notice less confusion, bit less treble and listening fatigue.


I'm not surre about your source. But when you are using PC usb into Qutest, try changing it to optical input on Qutest. 
You should hear improvement in overall "warmth/smoothness" of the sound.


----------



## emilsoft (Jan 26, 2021)

alxw0w said:


> I'm not surre about your source. But when you are using PC usb into Qutest, try changing it to optical input on Qutest.
> You should hear improvement in overall "warmth/smoothness" of the sound.



I tried different number of sources. m2tech hiface 2 usb to spdif converter, Fiio M11 Pro spdif out and ifi iUsb 3 usb out, and also optical via ifi spdif iPurifier, and my Apogee Element optical out. Not a massive difference between all of these as long as I use a good source, USB probably being the least attractive sounding and perhaps the optical a shade more relaxed than coax, but hardly much difference if any there. Where my Element doesn't really care what I plug into it - from crappy chromecast optical out to direct computer connection, it always cleans and reclocks everything and sounds the same. The Chord seems to appreciate bits of improvement albeit the signature doesn't change drastically


----------



## stretchneck

Yeah, I had fun last night.  Disconnected USB and attached via spdif.  Noise floor is perhaps a bit lower with spdif (I'm only using a Allo Nirvana to power my JCAT USB XE, better PSU arriving shortly).  However, there is no comparison in my setup, USB sounds better and is somewhat fuller in tone.


----------



## alxw0w

stretchneck said:


> Yeah, I had fun last night.  Disconnected USB and attached via spdif.  Noise floor is perhaps a bit lower with spdif (I'm only using a Allo Nirvana to power my JCAT USB XE, better PSU arriving shortly).  However, there is no comparison in my setup, USB sounds better and is somewhat fuller in tone.


Exactly fuller, more vivid, more exciting etc. I'm not saying you how to listen but in my case it was big no no when comparing USB to optical input on chord dacs.
At the beginning it seems like its better cuz of more vivid more exciting powerful sound.
But with time fatigue kicks in and you know something is not right (reading all the information that Rob Watts is giving about noise flor modulation and how it affects sound). Optical at first sounds duller not as exciting. But also smoother and with time fatigue does not appear.
Anyway just saying my two cents maybe for somebody it will help in fine tuning it's system.
As always your experience may vary depending on a lot of other things.


----------



## stretchneck

Yes indeed, I'm not done yet and will spend some more listening time with spdif.


----------



## stretchneck

There is definitely merit to spdif investigations.  I did a further test this morning and the soundstage is better constructed using spdif, with a noticeable increase in soundstage height compared to USB (and my USB set up is pretty darn good).  This is through speakers of course.

I will also try spdif with the warm filter as well, as it might keep the soundstage and bring the signature closer to USB compared to the neutral filter.

Optical cables:  Audioquest diamond, Sysconcept 24/192 and lifatec...  any further thoughts on these and suggestions?  Can any of these increase dynamics?


----------



## technobear

stretchneck said:


> Optical cables:  Audioquest diamond, Sysconcept 24/192 and lifatec...  any further thoughts on these and suggestions?  Can any of these increase dynamics?


QED Reference Quartz


----------



## stretchneck

technobear said:


> QED Reference Quartz


Impressions?


----------



## technobear

stretchneck said:


> Impressions?


None yet. I am considering a purchase. It is well thought of and made in the UK.


----------



## stretchneck

technobear said:


> None yet. I am considering a purchase. It is well thought of and made in the UK.


I decided to go for the Atlas Mavros Optical, apparently up there with the AQ Diamond optical.


----------



## HumanMedia (Feb 1, 2021)

Re optical cables, many on the Hugo MScaler thread recommend the (dirt cheap) KableDirekt Optical cable
https://www.amazon.co.uk/KabelDirekt-Optical-TOSLINK-Digital-Audio/dp/B004YEI7Y4/
the connectors seem to mate with chord equipment well and they have no trouble with 192khz data, which many of the more expensive do not.


----------



## Quince

Hi. Planning to add a 2nd amp to my chain, but do not want to get rid of the first one. Any suggestion on how to add an additional RCA output to the Qutest? I was thinking about this: https://www.audioquest.com/accessor...s/adaptors/hard-rca-splitter-male-to-2-female

Any negatives?


----------



## strider1007

@Quince 
Depending on the cables it might put a lot of strain/weight on the chassis..
I'm using these: https://www.audioquest.com/accessor...plitters/flx-x-rca-splitters-male-to-2-female


----------



## daytrader

HumanMedia said:


> Re optical cables, many on the Hugo MScaler thread recommend the (dirt cheap) KableDirekt Optical cable
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/KabelDirekt-Optical-TOSLINK-Digital-Audio/dp/B004YEI7Y4/
> the connectors seem to mate with chord equipment well and they have no trouble with 192khz data, which many of the more expensive do not.


I’ve used this cable and can confirm the cable looks and feels well made, has good connections that seat well and transmits without any issues.


----------



## Quince

strider1007 said:


> @Quince
> Depending on the cables it might put a lot of strain/weight on the chassis..
> I'm using these: https://www.audioquest.com/accessor...plitters/flx-x-rca-splitters-male-to-2-female



thanks!


----------



## ra990

HumanMedia said:


> Re optical cables, many on the Hugo MScaler thread recommend the (dirt cheap) KableDirekt Optical cable
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/KabelDirekt-Optical-TOSLINK-Digital-Audio/dp/B004YEI7Y4/
> the connectors seem to mate with chord equipment well and they have no trouble with 192khz data, which many of the more expensive do not.


Got this one recently, works really well with the MScaler, fits nicely and is a glass cable that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Works fine all the way up to 192k. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001D1A8KM


----------



## stretchneck

How does bnc (spdif) compare with toslink on the qutest?


----------



## reggiegasket

I'm also interested in a budget digital interconnect to use with the Qutest (RCA - BNC).

Can't decide whether to get a specific RCA - BNC or just a standard RCA - RCA then run an adpator on one end.


----------



## Chop-Top

reggiegasket said:


> I'm also interested in a budget digital interconnect to use with the Qutest (RCA - BNC).


https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm


----------



## daytrader

Chop-Top said:


> https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm


I use this one with my Zen Blue, sounds good.


----------



## The Jester

reggiegasket said:


> I'm also interested in a budget digital interconnect to use with the Qutest (RCA - BNC).
> 
> Can't decide whether to get a specific RCA - BNC or just a standard RCA - RCA then run an adpator on one end.


Best way to go is BNC to BNC with an adapter on one end ....


----------



## reggiegasket

Better than a RCA to RCA with a BNC adaptor on one end?

The streamer is RCA digital out and the Qutest is BNC in. 
So a RCA-BNC lead looks like the obvious solution but the market for leads like this is much smaller than the std RCA-RCA. 
If I go RCA-RCA with a BNC adaptor I can buy off ebay etc, and maybe get a s/hand bargain


----------



## The Jester

reggiegasket said:


> Better than a RCA to RCA with a BNC adaptor on one end?
> 
> The streamer is RCA digital out and the Qutest is BNC in.
> So a RCA-BNC lead looks like the obvious solution but the market for leads like this is much smaller than the std RCA-RCA.
> If I go RCA-RCA with a BNC adaptor I can buy off ebay etc, and maybe get a s/hand bargain


Closer to a 75 ohm transmission line with a BNC cable and an RCA adapter which is an SPDIF spec,
also longer than 1 metre if possible .... there’s a few RCA plugs that are close to the 75 ohm spec like the WBT stuff but one of those alone  is more $$ than several complete cables ... as soon as you put a standard RCA plug on a coax cable it’s no longer 75 ohms ...
Don’t have to go crazy but if you’ve got a DAC the quality of the Qutest why penny pinch on cables


----------



## GreenBow

stretchneck said:


> I tried a DAVE, technically perfect, but I didn't like it as the soundstage was way too set back for my liking.  I now have the qutest.  Works better for me in the fact that everything is somewhat more upfront and vocals have presence (slightly more forward?).
> 
> I do find it a more darker sounding DAC than the DAVE though, the highs are also somewhat recessed, and this decreases it's realism IMO.  I use the incisive neutral filter and Oyaide Tunami Terzo RR v2  and Sablon 2020 USB.
> 
> ...




If the Qutest highs sound recessed I think it's something else in your system. Qutest is flat neutral to me.


----------



## reggiegasket

cheers Jester


----------



## HumanMedia (Feb 5, 2021)

The Jester said:


> Closer to a 75 ohm transmission line with a BNC cable and an RCA adapter which is an SPDIF spec,
> also longer than 1 metre if possible .... there’s a few RCA plugs that are close to the 75 ohm spec like the WBT stuff but one of those alone  is more $$ than several complete cables ... as soon as you put a standard RCA plug on a coax cable it’s no longer 75 ohms ...
> Don’t have to go crazy but if you’ve got a DAC the quality of the Qutest why penny pinch on cables



Maybe with standard RCA but the RCA connectors used in the Blue Jeans cable being discussed are specifically designed to be close to 75ohm as possible and are probably better than the WBT, it is mentioned in their spec sheet, they also connect the ground connection to the shell in a coaxial fashion,
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/pages/technicaldocs/canarercap.pdf

IMO a Blue Jeans BNC to RCA will be far better than a BNC cable with an adapter.


----------



## The Jester

I wouldn’t go that far but a good option would be to order one of those to make sure the cable isn’t the weakest link,
the “Grab one off eBay” limitation had me choosing  the BNC cable with an adapter the best option ...


----------



## triggsviola

I have the Qutest and love it, but I'm trying to use it with a passive preamp and a power amplifier. I am getting an extremely loud hum/buzz when I do this. It's a very simple Nobsound High Precision Passive Preamp. It's just got an RCA in and out and an ALPS volume pot. Why am I getting this loud noise? When I use my Feliks Echo as a preamp, no noise. Thanks!


----------



## Jon L (Feb 7, 2021)

triggsviola said:


> I have the Qutest and love it, but I'm trying to use it with a passive preamp and a power amplifier. I am getting an extremely loud hum/buzz when I do this. It's a very simple Nobsound High Precision Passive Preamp. It's just got an RCA in and out and an ALPS volume pot. Why am I getting this loud noise? When I use my Feliks Echo as a preamp, no noise. Thanks!


There is no rhyme or reason when it comes to these types of presumed ground loop/hum noises.  Feliks Echo is likely breaking a ground loop internally or draining it to wall via ground wire on the power cord.
Take a long piece of wire and touch one end to chassis screw or ground pin of RCA on Qutest and the other end of wire to similar screw/ground pin on the amp.  If this doesn't get rid of the noise, try touching the two ends of wires to possible ground screw/pin between various components in the system.  Don't forget about the ground pin on the DC jack of power supplies and music server/computers.

I have gotten rid of noise with this method with various component makeups over time, and I currently use a DIY System Starground system.  Fancy way of saying I attached wires to the ground pin of AC plug and attach the wire ends to various components at chassis screws or ground pins to achieve the lowest system background noise level, which is critical for my 111 dB sensitive horns.




0207211427 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## triggsviola

I tried using an sbooster, which lowered the hum a lot, but it's still very much there.


----------



## ra990

triggsviola said:


> I tried using an sbooster, which lowered the hum a lot, but it's still very much there.


Try a regular old battery/power bank to power your Qutest. It won't get cleaner than that. If you still have issues, switch from USB to optical if you can.


----------



## triggsviola

I tried all of that. I'm thinking maybe it's the power amp. It's an Audio-gd Precision 3. Audio-gd isn't exactly known for their engineering. I think I'm going to replace the amplifier.


----------



## UNOE

I haven't seen anyone mention LCX paired with this DAC. Do you think this DAC is overkill for LCX. Would I have to upgrade my amp.


----------



## strider1007

The main task of the amplifier is to drive the headphones (speakers). As long as that works for you, there is no reason to upgrade.

A better DAC will provide a better quality of signal for the amp, resulting in better music through your headphones.

Obviously they shouldn't be too far apart, but I don't think that's the case here..


----------



## UNOE

strider1007 said:


> The main task of the amplifier is to drive the headphones (speakers). As long as that works for you, there is no reason to upgrade.
> 
> A better DAC will provide a better quality of signal for the amp, resulting in better music through your headphones.
> 
> Obviously they shouldn't be too far apart, but I don't think that's the case here..


Right now I have a Topping D50 with the LCX but when I put my mojo with the LCX it’s much better. I just thinking Qutest might be overkill for that amp.


----------



## Redflamingolingo (Feb 14, 2021)

Quick question. Sorry if this is a silly one. If I use USB connection from PC to Qutest, I get the Qutest as a sound device on my Windows sound options. If I do optical from my soundcard to the Qutest optical, then the Qutest as a device disappears. I'm still sending the signal through the Qutest, though.

My question is does this at all interfere with the sound quality? Am I still getting the sound from the Qutest DAC? I would use optical on my motherboard, but it does not work.

I'm just curious if running the optical from my soundcard to the Qutest makes a difference in sound quality. I can't really hear a difference versus USB. I want to make sure that the signal isn't tainted by the soundcard. I assume it isn't because if I go into the soundcard control panel, nothing I do affects the actual sound of the audio such as EQ or even flipping the out signal from headphones to speakers, etc.

Thanks, everyone.


----------



## strider1007 (Feb 14, 2021)

You should see the sound-card's name (with something like SPDIF or Optical in your windows sound menu)..

I see SPDIF-out ( Sound Blaster Z ) in mine.

Optical sounds a little better than USB in my setup, but as they say YMMV..


----------



## Redflamingolingo

strider1007 said:


> You should see the sound-card's name (with something like SPDIF or Optical in your windows sound menu)..
> 
> I see SPDIF-out ( Sound Blaster Z ) in mine.
> 
> Optical sounds a little better than USB in my setup, but as they say YMMV..



I see that in the setup and it works. Just wanted to make sure that running SPDIF out to Qutest wouldn't degrade audio quality. I'm assuming not?


----------



## strider1007 (Feb 15, 2021)

Like I said, in my case optical even sounded a little better than USB. I used a 5 m. Audioquest Cinnamon USB  A>B cable and a 3 m. $10 optical plastic fiber. The optical sounded less rough, less grainy. Than a friend brought a real glass optical, and we did a blind test. Across the board the real glass cable won. More definition, more instrument separation, voices more focussed.. Not night and day, more night and ehh.. later that night...

So now I'm waiting for a 3m QED Reference Optical Quartz cable, should be here early next month.


----------



## Redflamingolingo

strider1007 said:


> Like I said, in my case optical even sounded a little better than USB. I used a 5 m. Audioquest Cinnamon USB  A>B cable and a 3 m. $10 optical plastic fiber. The optical sounded less rough, less grainy. Than a friend brought a real glass optical, and we did a blind test. Across the board the real glass cable won. More definition, more instrument separation, voices more focussed.. Not night and day, more night and ehh.. later that night...
> 
> So now I'm waiting for a 3m QED Reference Optical Quartz cable, should be here early next month.



Nice, thank you!


----------



## hikaru12

Jon L said:


> While Qutest/A90 combo will sound great, if I had A90, I would be looking at DAC's that have true balanced XLR outputs since A90 is often reported to sound best run balanced.
> Chord DAC's are inherently single-ended, and note that Qutest only has RCA outputs, which is part of the reason I chose Qutest because I planned on tube amps that are single-ended only and did not want to pay for balanced outputs I will not use.



I'm in this boat now - I'm trying to upgrade from the BiFrost 2 and most DACs (at least from Schiits offerings) run better balanced and they gimp the SE outputs. The D90 and Qutest are the strongest contenders. The Qutest I've heard is a little bass shy compared to something like the Gumby/Yggy though which is a bummer.


----------



## zeitlos (Feb 22, 2021)

I’m currently looking for a replacement for my Cambridge Audio 851N. The problem is that it’s to long for my rack.

A dealer recommended the Auralic Altair G1 and the Chord QUTEST in combination with the a streamer.

Now I have some questions which I cannot answer myself:

1. Can I use an iPad to connect to the Chord DAC or do I have to use a PC/MAC?

2. In a review I read that only PCs can manage 512 DSD. Is this still true?

3. How can I make use of the Chord DAC when using Qobuz on an iPad?

Final question:

4. Is the Chord QUTEST superior to the Auralic Altair G1 and also the Auralic Vega 1 in terms of its sound quality?

5. Oh, one more question (sorry, I am really lost): I would like to use the original Qobuz software to listen to music, but so far I had to use the manufacturer’s (in my case now Cambridge Audio) App instead of the Qobuz App when I wanted to listen in best quality. Qobuz only worked via Airplay and then the quality was restricted.

Maybe someone could answer (so of) my question(s). I highly appreciate every response!


----------



## JazzAudioDog (Feb 23, 2021)

Hi everyone! I just joined because the forum is great! I’ve lurked for quite a while while doing audio research so I thought it was time because I bought a Qutest 3 weeks ago and have been listening/burning it in. It only has 95 hrs on it so far, so it’s decent but I’ve not experienced the Qutest magic yet except for one night, a Saturday night about 6pm, it was awesome until I turned the system off for the night (Qutest stays on 24x7).

I’ve experienced this in the past with other DACs and other sources so I know my mains power is likely crap despite having dedicated lines, good power cables, and a power conditioner. So I’ve been following the LPS discussion with great interest.

One key question at this time:

I thought I’ve read that the Qutest has been sold for several years. I just bought mine new from a retailer and the serial number is quite low, approximately #150.  Do you think it’s possible I was sold new old stock that may not have had all updates (if any) and that could be why the Qutest magic hasn’t locked in ?  By that I mean the sound is thin, bass shy, soundstage depth and width are mediocre, timbre is definitely off for the first hour of play, e.g., tenor sax sounds like alto and occasionally even soprano. Music has no body. And then there’s the power supply impact on the sound. It seems to be very large for my unit rather than minor as described many times in this thread.

I realize that I need to let additional burn in occur before I decide but I wanted your opinions. Thanks!

EDIT:  I realized tonight I can’t just listen to old jazz and classic rock. I tried some much more recent albums and the Qutest displayed a very wide and fairly deep soundstage and decent bass, and good imaging.  More time, more burn-in will tell but for now it’s sounding pretty damn nice! I got spoiled listening to old music with tube DACs — they’re a good fit for each other.

EDIT 2: An update.  Chord responded that my Qutest is brand new. My unit was manufactured late last fall. They reinitialized serial numbers on Qutest in October 2020 so they wouldn’t run into serial numbers for a different product of theirs. Great rapid response from Chord! I received an answer the same morning I sent the request even though it must have been about 7pm there.


----------



## strider1007

@JazzAudioDog 
Welcome, welcome..

I bought my Qutest in December, serial number 00645. 

If you have doubts about your unit, I think an email to Chord will get you the production date.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

strider1007,   Thank you! I’m glad to be here!  This thread was most important to my purchase research and key to my buy of the Qutest.  It’s great that Qutest owners are so willing to share their experiences and ideas.  And Rob also!


----------



## Jgeffen

blueninjasix said:


> And my understanding is that Chord have changed their blurb to now say the limit for optical is 96khz and not 192khz as previously stated even in the Qutest manual.


Correct, but if I play a 192khz song over my Yamaha streamer with the 192khz optical out, the Qutest is indicating with the correct color that there is a 192khz song playing. I’m using the newest QED reference cable. So, I don’t think 🤔 Chord is correct.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

Jgeffen said:


> Correct, but if I play a 192khz song over my Yamaha streamer with the 192khz optical out, the Qutest is indicating with the correct color that there is a 192khz song playing. I’m using the newest QED reference cable. So, I don’t think 🤔 Chord is correct.


Perhaps it’s because the S/PDIF optical spec is 96kHz but optical can achieve 192khz if both the sending and receiving S/PDIF boards are capable and compatible and also the cable as well. There’s no way for Chord to assure the capabilities of the sending equipment (e.g., the streamer S/PDIF board and the optical cable).


----------



## Jgeffen

JazzAudioDog said:


> Perhaps it’s because the S/PDIF optical spec is 96kHz but optical can achieve 192khz if both the sending and receiving S/PDIF boards are capable and compatible and also the cable as well. There’s no way for Chord to assure the capabilities of the sending equipment (e.g., the streamer S/PDIF board and the optical cable).


Thanks for your reaction. I think you are right. In my Yamaha specs they say the optical out it is limited to 192khz. So, I’m happy to see that the Chord Qutest is receiving the same amount. The files in my library are also limited to 192khz too.


----------



## Jgeffen

JazzAudioDog said:


> Perhaps it’s because the S/PDIF optical spec is 96kHz but optical can achieve 192khz if both the sending and receiving S/PDIF boards are capable and compatible and also the cable as well. There’s no way for Chord to assure the capabilities of the sending equipment (e.g., the streamer S/PDIF board and the optical cable).


Btw, on their website they say the Qutest it is limited to 96khz.


----------



## miketlse

Jgeffen said:


> Btw, on their website they say the Qutest it is limited to 96khz.


the reason is given here


----------



## daytrader

Jgeffen said:


> Btw, on their website they say the Qutest it is limited to 96khz.


I appreciated the post right after that, “Now you are going to have to get a Chord M Scaler to accessorise with that Wave cable!”  Translation -  it’s going to cost you to climb up the KHz ladder with Chord! 🤑


----------



## George Hincapie

Chop-Top said:


> https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm



I use Blue Jeans in both my headphone system and main system. Excellent cables.


----------



## GreenBow (Feb 24, 2021)

JazzAudioDog said:


> Hi everyone! I just joined because the forum is great! I’ve lurked for quite a while while doing audio research so I thought it was time because I bought a Qutest 3 weeks ago and have been listening/burning it in. It only has 95 hrs on it so far, so it’s decent but I’ve not experienced the Qutest magic yet except for one night, a Saturday night about 6pm, it was awesome until I turned the system off for the night (Qutest stays on 24x7).
> 
> I’ve experienced this in the past with other DACs and other sources so I know my mains power is likely crap despite having dedicated lines, good power cables, and a power conditioner. So I’ve been following the LPS discussion with great interest.
> 
> ...




It's difficult to know what to advise.

I suspect it could be that you have not got the hang of the Chord signature yet, and the Qutest signature. ......... I'll explain this as brief as possible and see it it make sense.

My music started of with a Meridian Explorer (which is a budget DAC) on my PC. I had it for a good while. Then I got the Chord Mojo. It took me at least a week of very regular listening before I could think I would keep it. At first it sounded thin, cold, and metallic. It was however more detailed than my Meridian Explorer, and I was imagining keeping it because of that. At about one week of lots of listening, I came to the conclusion that it was smoother than the Meridian Explorer. I based that on it being less grainy or crackly; or distortion.

By ten days, I was finding it was actually warm because the timbres were more accurate.  That was opposed to my Meridian Explorer that was warm because it had a thicker bass singature. ... Anyway from ten days onwards it was all uphill. By two weeks I was sold, and the rest is history.

I next bought the Hugo 2, which is a Qutest in other form on any other day. That was an even loger adjustment period for me. It took a moth of continuous lsitening to adjust. It was also massively more detailed than the Mojo, and I was compelled to listen. Life was too short not to listen.

(By the by, I have the TT2 and the Qutest as well now.)

I think the reason it took so long to adjust was, because I knew my music with my previous DAC. That was with every upgrade.


Anyway my guess is maybe that's how it is for you. Your old DAC signature is possibly much less detailed, or just very different. ... Of course you may have a faulty unit or a dodgy cable/connection. Stick with USB or optical for now too, as coaxial is more prone to RFI which causes brightness.

My suggestion is just listen to it as much as possible; listen, listen, listen. (Also, stick to the supplied power adapter for at least a month.) ..... When I say my Hugo 2 took a month to adjust to, I exaggerate not one iota.


----------



## JazzAudioDog (Feb 24, 2021)

GreenBow, thank you!  I had my old DAC so long, 7 years, I’ve forgotten what other digital sources sounded like. For many of those years I was into vinyl for more than half of my listening time. And I’ve been dreaming of a optical cable...


----------



## GreenBow (Feb 24, 2021)

JazzAudioDog said:


> GreenBow, thank you!  I had my old DAC so long, 7 years, I’ve forgotten what other digital sources sounded like. For many of those years I was into vinyl for more than half of my listening time. And I’ve been dreaming of a optical cable...



Well without probing about your old DAC, even old Chord's are surpassed by the new ones.

Since you said you used your old DAC for seven years though, it would suggest brain-burn-in for you. Or in other words time to adjust to the new DAC. Process all the new detail.

The reason I say this is because you had your DAC for so long. You will know a lot of your music on your old DAC, off by heart. Every tone, sound postitions in certain tracks etc. The new Qutest will be seriously quite different to your old DAC, and new details will sound disconnected. Like stuff everywhere - to me when I moved to Hugo 2 it was like new shards of sounds everywhere; almost blinding. Now Hugo 2 sounds solid and complete.

One suggestion I could make is listen to some music that you do not know. That way you will have no reference to your old DAC's performance of new music. (I think it will sound still somewhat dazzling or need time. However new music will likely sound much more complete and solid, than music you are 'old DAC' familiar with.)


----------



## Jgeffen

daytrader said:


> I appreciated the post right after that, “Now you are going to have to get a Chord M Scaler to accessorise with that Wave cable!”  Translation -  it’s going to cost you to climb up the KHz ladder with Chord! 🤑


I wish to have, but it's so expensive! I hope Chord will one day produce a DAC with the M Scaler in it for a reasonable price. I'm also looking to add the Denafrips Gaia, but that is a different cup to tea. One guy on another forum wrote after trying: it will better the Qutest in specific ways. Did someone on this forum try this device already?


----------



## HumanMedia

Jgeffen said:


> I wish to have, but it's so expensive! I hope Chord will one day produce a DAC with the M Scaler in it for a reasonable price. I'm also looking to add the Denafrips Gaia, but that is a different cup to tea. One guy on another forum wrote after trying: it will better the Qutest in specific ways. Did someone on this forum try this device already?



i checked out the Chord site last week and noticed that in the section titled “Product Types” was “Upscalers” (plural) which when you open it has a single product, the Hugo M Scaler. It sure does feel like a lot of empty space on that page. I know all this means nothing, but it sure feels like the site design implies that there will be another product in that section at some time.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

GreenBow said:


> Well without probing about your old DAC, even old Chord's are surpassed by the new ones.
> 
> Since you said you used your old DAC for seven years though, it would suggest brain-burn-in for you. Or in other words time to adjust to the new DAC. Process all the new detail.
> 
> ...


Another excellent recommendation! Well, I did it and you’re correct. It’s that, and also the relatively mediocre quality of my choice of source material. I listened to a new material hi-res playlist on Qobuz, “Hi-Res Best of 2020 - Pop/Rock”, and it was incredible! Not the type of music that I’d normally listen to.

The Qutest magic was all there, soundstage width 4 feet outside the speakers, deep layered soundstage, good imaging, great timbre, silence between notes.  It was like I was listening to an audiophile-level CD or vinyl where you don’t really like the music but it sounds so good you listen anyway. And I discovered that Taylor Swift has an incredible voice  

Some of the old jazz and classic rock music has been remastered well, but not much. And very little of that matches the audio quality of the hi-res playlist I heard last night. Truly enlightening, and I discovered the excellent capability of the Qutest.  

By the way, I have about 140 hours listening time on the Qutest so it‘s possible there may be more improvements with additional burn-in time.  A dealer (not mine) said he gives DACs 500 hours of play time before he does critical listening.


----------



## Triode User

HumanMedia said:


> i checked out the Chord site last week and noticed that in the section titled “Product Types” was “Upscalers” (plural) which when you open it has a single product, the Hugo M Scaler. It sure does feel like a lot of empty space on that page. I know all this means nothing, but it sure feels like the site design implies that there will be another product in that section at some time.


The Blu2 is displayed prominently on the Choral, Full Size and Reference range photos but I can’t find it anywhere in the current products or the legacy products. Can anyone see it? Has it gone into some form of limbo?


----------



## miketlse

Triode User said:


> The Blu2 is displayed prominently on the Choral, Full Size and Reference range photos but I can’t find it anywhere in the current products or the legacy products. Can anyone see it? Has it gone into some form of limbo?


Chord discontinued production months ago, because the Phillips CD transport was no longer available.
Some dealers still advertise the Blu2, but I don't know where they will source their stock.


----------



## Hooster

Triode User said:


> The Blu2 is displayed prominently on the Choral, Full Size and Reference range photos but I can’t find it anywhere in the current products or the legacy products. Can anyone see it? Has it gone into some form of limbo?



I suppose that the Blu3 is imminent!


----------



## miketlse

Hooster said:


> I suppose that the Blu3 is imminent!


Yes, it certainly now represents a 'gap' in the Chord product line, that in an ideal world needs filling.
Will it be filled, is the bigger question. The Phillips CD drive set a high technical baseline, for its successors to follow.
Rob is also usually not interested in developing the next version of 'gear' unless the performance represents an improvement.

But we are not living in 'an ideal world' at the moment, and for manufacturers the costs of developing future products can be a showstopper.
So some 'negative' criteria in play, which gives me high confidence that Chord will prove me wrong, and pull a rabbit from the hat.
Expect a new CD transport during 2021.


----------



## hikaru12

strider1007 said:


> @JazzAudioDog
> Welcome, welcome..
> 
> I bought my Qutest in December, serial number 00645.
> ...


Hey I saw that you mentioned you liked optical better than USB. Was the sound smoother? Coming from the BF2 the Qutest is a bit bright on the green filter but there is definitely a big jump in detail. It may become a nonfactor when I get my BHC in as I can tune it warmer but just curious on your thoughts.


----------



## strider1007 (Mar 3, 2021)

hikaru12 said:


> Hey I saw that you mentioned you liked optical better than USB. Was the sound smoother? Coming from the BF2 the Qutest is a bit bright on the green filter but there is definitely a big jump in detail. It may become a nonfactor when I get my BHC in as I can tune it warmer but just curious on your thoughts.


Hi, I don't think the brightness changed that much, USB sounded a bit more gritty, grainy.. Optical was definitely smoother in sound texture, not so much tonal balance.. Definition improved pretty much as well. Instruments had more discernibly their own place on the stage. USB merged them more together.

For the moment I'm using a 3m. plastic fiber optical, still waiting for the QED glass version (next week, fingers crossed) using the green filter.

On another front, I got, literally two hours ago, the sbooster power-supply. That's playing now, and first impressions are good, really good... Will follow-up later..


----------



## okplayer

is anyone using an after market power supply into a power conditioner....

my thought is since using a SR power conditioner with a dedicated circuit that the qutest being a cheap stock  power supply is enough?


----------



## hikaru12

T Bone said:


> I'm conducting a bit of an experiment tonight.  I'm comparing my new Chord Qutest to my "old" Holo Spring DAC.  I've got my system configured in such a way (albeit temporarily) to quickly A:B both DAC's on the same amp.
> For this test, I'm using a HeadAmp GS-X mk2 headphone amplifier to drive my Focal Utopia's.  I have my Chord Qutest plugged into my desktop PC via a Curious USB cable.  The Holo Spring is being fed by a Mano Ultra streamer.  I am using ROON to stream the same album track to both DACs.    .....it's not the most scientific setup, but I've gotten some very interesting results to share.
> 
> (1) The differences between the Holo Spring and the Qutest aren't as wide as I would have imagined.  The Holo still punches above its weight class.
> ...



Sorry to resurrect such an old post but did you have a preference when comparing the Spring vs the Qutest? I’m in that boat now. The Qutest definitely sounds more clearer than my old Bifrost but it won out on slam and tonality. It’s making me want to give a second look at the Holo and NOS Dacs in general like the Amethyst.


----------



## karmapolice

Be careful as most mhdt dacs don't output above 16/44.1 albeit they accept high resolution files


----------



## iamdman

Hello,

I started using BNC cables as input to Qutest. (from MScaler) and noticed that any slight wobble of cable causes audio to be distracted / crack. I double checked and confirmed the cables are connected properly with snug fit. Is it the nature of BNC connection to be so sensitive to any movement? 

Thanks


----------



## The Jester

Was that with the BNC cables that came with the MScaler ?


----------



## iamdman

No, using moon audio silver dragon bnc cables.


----------



## iamdman

Anyone using qutest in BNC inputs, do you experience what I am seeing -when the cable is even slightly physically touched say slightly lifted (not even near the socket but say right in the middle)  it  audio to crack/ distort? Makes me wonder if the physical socket of qutest is very sensitive , but making sure it’s not my cable or combination of both. 

If the cable is not physically touched or moved even slightly there are no issues and audio seems fine but sometimes as I move things around in table it touches the cable and makes the connection go bad for few seconds and then works. Not sure if I need a isolation feet for the dac. 

Any feedback much appreciated!


----------



## ra990

iamdman said:


> Anyone using qutest in BNC inputs, do you experience what I am seeing -when the cable is even slightly physically touched say slightly lifted (not even near the socket but say right in the middle)  it  audio to crack/ distort? Makes me wonder if the physical socket of qutest is very sensitive , but making sure it’s not my cable or combination of both.
> 
> If the cable is not physically touched or moved even slightly there are no issues and audio seems fine but sometimes as I move things around in table it touches the cable and makes the connection go bad for few seconds and then works. Not sure if I need a isolation feet for the dac.
> 
> Any feedback much appreciated!


Happens to me as well - just the heavy cables pulling on the socket. I set it in position and leave it. I have a hook on the wall that I wrap the cables around to support them so they won't pull on the socket, but yes, if I move my desk or the cables, same thing happens.


----------



## iamdman

ra990 said:


> Happens to me as well - just the heavy cables pulling on the socket. I set it in position and leave it. I have a hook on the wall that I wrap the cables around to support them so they won't pull on the socket, but yes, if I move my desk or the cables, same thing happens.


ra990,

Thanks for the info, much appreciated! I was suspecting the weight of cable as well and good idea on supporting those cables. I might try using a hockey puck to support the cable and see.


----------



## reggiegasket

hi all, just got myself a qutest, fed by a Bluesound Node 2i. Very impressed so far. A noticeable step up from the vanilla Node 2i, and excellent resolution of detail and voices, and yet very easy to listen to. So much so I'm now thinking of pushing it further - maybe a IFi power supply?


----------



## Triode User

reggiegasket said:


> hi all, just got myself a qutest, fed by a Bluesound Node 2i. Very impressed so far. A noticeable step up from the vanilla Node 2i, and excellent resolution of detail and voices, and yet very easy to listen to. So much so I'm now thinking of pushing it further - maybe a IFi power supply?



I also had a Node 2i and found adding a Qutest to be a huge increase in sound quality. For me the next quantum increase in sound quality was to install a commercially available interface power board in the 2i instead of the factory SMPS and use an outboard LPS to power the 2i. Yes I did later use a third party power supply for the Qutest as well but you will be surprised at how much better you can make the 2i sound by changing its power supply. I don't know which country you are in but here in the UK the interface boards are on ebay from at least two manufacturers. Just search on ebay for 'Node 2i interface'.


----------



## GreenBow

hikaru12 said:


> Sorry to resurrect such an old post but did you have a preference when comparing the Spring vs the Qutest? I’m in that boat now. The Qutest definitely sounds more clearer than my old Bifrost but it won out on slam and tonality. It’s making me want to give a second look at the Holo and NOS Dacs in general like the Amethyst.



Can I ask how long you compared the Qutest to the Bitfrost. 

I don't know the Bitfrost or it's value. Just that I am surprised to see a Qutest coming second on tonality. Must have been up against some serious DAC.

If a Chord DAC is listened to in a short comparison, sometimes it's qualities are not noticed. It can takea good long slisteing to be able to get into a Chord. It took me ages with each Chord DAC upgrade I had, to get fully accustomed.

Not being cheeky with you by the way, just saying.


----------



## technobear (Mar 27, 2021)

GreenBow said:


> Can I ask how long you compared the Qutest to the Bitfrost.
> 
> I don't know the Bitfrost or it's value. Just that I am surprised to see a Qutest coming second on tonality. Must have been up against some serious DAC.
> 
> ...


It takes a while to stop flinching in readiness for uncomfortable passages, then to realise that you have stopped flinching in readiness for those passages as they are no longer uncomfortable but instead just sound natural and smooth. Chip DACs are less 'digital' than they used to be but the Chord DACs take it to another level altogether.

After a while with a Qutest or Hugo2, it's tough going back to a chip DAC. Whenever I listen to my speaker system now, I have thoughts as to whether I should sell the ADI-2 DAC and get a Qutest instead. I can't face the faff of unplugging and detaching the Hugo2 from the headphone rig and connecting it up to the speaker rig every day but when I did, the sound was much easier to listen to with the Hugo2.


----------



## hikaru12

GreenBow said:


> Can I ask how long you compared the Qutest to the Bitfrost.
> 
> I don't know the Bitfrost or it's value. Just that I am surprised to see a Qutest coming second on tonality. Must have been up against some serious DAC.
> 
> ...



The Qutest sounds brighter than the Bifrost by quite a bit - unpleasantly so. I also don't really care for D/S DACs as they sound too flat and not really lifelike. Qutest was impressive technically but didn't really do anything for me.


----------



## GreenBow (Mar 28, 2021)

technobear said:


> It takes a while to stop flinching in readiness for uncomfortable passages, then to realise that you have stopped flinching in readiness for those passages as they are no longer uncomfortable but instead just sound natural and smooth. Chip DACs are less 'digital' than they used to be but the Chord DACs take it to another level altogether.
> 
> After a while with a Qutest or Hugo2, it's tough going back to a chip DAC. Whenever I listen to my speaker system now, I have thoughts as to whether I should sell the ADI-2 DAC and get a Qutest instead. I can't face the faff of unplugging and detaching the Hugo2 from the headphone rig and connecting it up to the speaker rig every day but when I did, the sound was much easier to listen to with the Hugo2.



I would get the Qutest. (I have a Qutest and Hugo 2, for virtually the same reason and other reasons.)



hikaru12 said:


> The Qutest sounds brighter than the Bifrost by quite a bit - unpleasantly so. I also don't really care for D/S DACs as they sound too flat and not really lifelike. Qutest was impressive technically but didn't really do anything for me.



The Qutest is not a bright DAC.

If it sounds bright there are reasons why.
1. Maybe a Coaxial cable is inducing RFI noise.
2. Partnering kit is bright.
3. You just didn't adjust to it yet. (Have explained a billion times. Not doing it again.)

EDIT: Short version. It takes some people a month to adjust to Chord DACs. Believe it or not they can sound thin, bright, and metallic at first: then they sound 'right' once listener adjusted. It's all the new detail that deceptively sounds bright at first. The adjustment process is often referred to as brain-burn-in.


----------



## Arniesb

hikaru12 said:


> The Qutest sounds brighter than the Bifrost by quite a bit - unpleasantly so. I also don't really care for D/S DACs as they sound too flat and not really lifelike. Qutest was impressive technically but didn't really do anything for me.


Bifrost is lot less transparent and it wont highlight flaws in your system like Qutest can.
Improve your chain and you will see it destroying Bifrost.
Try Optical or Usb Coming out from Smartphone and you will see how much smoother it can sound.


----------



## ayang02

https://www.chordelectronics.jp/products/qutest-range/qutest-plus/

Anyone know anything about this? A new linear PSU + Qutest combo from Chord?


----------



## antdroid

ayang02 said:


> https://www.chordelectronics.jp/products/qutest-range/qutest-plus/
> 
> Anyone know anything about this? A new linear PSU + Qutest combo from Chord?



Interesting, considering I thought it was said that Linear PSU wouldn't make a difference.


----------



## miketlse (Mar 31, 2021)

deleted


----------



## daytrader (Mar 28, 2021)

antdroid said:


> Interesting, considering I thought it was said that Linear PSU wouldn't make a difference.


Only makes a difference and sense when it‘s offered by Chord! 🤑


----------



## Hooster

daytrader said:


> Only makes a difference and sense when it‘s offered by Chord! 🤑



Would someone from Chord please respond and clarify this? (Sorry, my request will most likely be ignored. I have tried to ask them to post here before and it was about as useful as trying to move the Ever Given with a little nudge... Chord staff has better things to do.)


----------



## ayang02

miketlse said:


> No hint of it on the official site. https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/qutest/
> @Mojo ideas is this true, or a fake webpage attempt to defraud people of money.



I actually first saw it here on a Japanese shop: https://www.fujiya-avic.co.jp/shop/g/g200000058344/

Then I could only find information about this on the Japanese Chord website. Maybe this is  a region-exclusive product?


----------



## Hooster

ayang02 said:


> I actually first saw it here on a Japanese shop: https://www.fujiya-avic.co.jp/shop/g/g200000058344/
> 
> Then I could only find information about this on the Japanese Chord website. Maybe this is  a region-exclusive product?



No, they ship worldwide.


----------



## ayang02

Hooster said:


> No, they ship worldwide.



I mean this Qutest plus combo specifically might be a region-exclusive release? Since I haven’t seen any news elsewhere? I know Fuji Avic can ship worldwide with that WorldShipping service so any region-specific product can ship anywhere if you are willing to pay.


----------



## The Jester

if it’s only for the local market then in the specs it says “AC 100v”


----------



## Triode User

ayang02 said:


> https://www.chordelectronics.jp/products/qutest-range/qutest-plus/
> 
> Anyone know anything about this? A new linear PSU + Qutest combo from Chord?



I can’t read / translate the website but the picture looks like a third party after market PSU.


----------



## uzi2

Triode User said:


> I can’t read / translate the website but the picture looks like a third party after market PSU.


Google translate...
"The linear regulated power supply DCA-5V, which was developed by Audio Design Co., Ltd. using analog technology, has low noise, extremely low impedance in a wide frequency band, and excellent transient response characteristics. The exclusive model for Qutest Plus. Is a matte black model that matches the design of Qutest."
I'm happy with my Shanti powering Pi4 and Qutest.


----------



## Triode User

uzi2 said:


> I'm happy with my Shanti powering Pi4 and Qutest.


I also think the Shanti is good having tried my friend’s Shanti on a variety of devices. I had it to try because he had asked me as a favour to change the captive DC output leads for better ones. In fact what I did was to put GX-16 output sockets on it so he could easily change the cables. I was surprised how much difference that made to the SQ of the connected device. However from personal experience I would never  connect any other device to a power supply that was also powering the MScaler.


----------



## reggiegasket

Triode User said:


> For me the next quantum increase in sound quality was to install a commercially available interface power board in the 2i


Interesting, thanks. I have a couple of other tweaks in the pipeline (mainly room stuff) but I'll have a look at that next.


----------



## reggiegasket (Mar 30, 2021)

Just to follow up... I'm in the UK so the board on ebay (from fidelity_audio) is ~ £150 delivered, plus I'd need a 5V PSU, so the iFi one for £50 would fit (I think). That would be a £200 upgrade, correct?

Obviously I could drop more £ on the PSU part but the budget is fairly tight


----------



## Triode User

reggiegasket said:


> Just to follow up... I'm in the UK so the board on ebay (from fidelity_audio) is ~ £150 delivered, plus I'd need a 5V PSU, so the iFi one for £50 would fit (I think). That would be a £200 upgrade, correct?
> 
> Obviously I could drop more £ on the PSU part but the budget is fairly tight


I bought my interface board for the 2i from Poland via ebay and it was just over £70 when I bought it. I tested a whole load of power supplies with it. The iFi is a really good price but you will reap significant rewards by stretching to an Allo Shanti. Better still was an Sbooster. There are many others around as well though.

This is the interface I bought.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bluesoun...299541?hash=item4b8fb12955:g:zWcAAOSwW2Zef9aM


----------



## reggiegasket

Nice one, thanks


----------



## Another Audiophile

If the qutest had xlr output it would have been the perfect DAC. That’s actually the reason I am selling mine. In my space I need to run long cables and RCA is not an option


----------



## okplayer

for those that are using a linear power supply with the qutest I wanted to know if you are using a dedicated line and a power conditioner.  I am wondering how much benefit there is to the linear power supply if you are already plugging the qutest wall wart into a power conditioner which goes into a dedicated circuit.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

Yes and yes to your two questions. The Sbooster with Ultra addition added a little more bass but more importantly the bass was much tighter. With the stock power supply, after you get your Qutest to 250+ hours burn-in listening time you’ll notice the “fat bottom” that at least one reviewer mentioned.  The fat bottem end is not unpleasant and sounds like older tube amplifiers to me.  The sbooster bass improvement is definitely there but may be somewhat of a personal preference.

in addition, I‘ve heard better imaging and soundstage depth so far with the Sbooster.  I only have 75 hours on it plus another 50 hrs of “silent streaming” (I.e., amp not on) So it will likely improve more.


----------



## Another Audiophile

Have mine for sale in classified if anyone is interested


----------



## Quince

I am using the Sbooster (sans ultra) off an iFi PowerStation, and the improvements, as they say, are not subtle. I went from stock PS to a battery pack to Sbooster. There is more difference in going from the Battery to the Sbooster than from stock to battery. To my ears, of course


----------



## Hyperkin

Can someone confirm the Adafruit micro USB to DC 5.5 adapter will work on the Qutest? I am concerned about the polarity on the adapter.

I got a LPS around not used and want to give it a try on the Qutest. 

Link for Adafruit is below.

https://www.adafruit.com/product/2727

Much appreciated.


----------



## technobear

Hyperkin said:


> Can someone confirm the Adafruit micro USB to DC 5.5 adapter will work on the Qutest? I am concerned about the polarity on the adapter.
> 
> I got a LPS around not used and want to give it a try on the Qutest.
> 
> ...


The answer is in the second sentence of the description on the page you have linked.


----------



## Hyperkin

technobear said:


> The answer is in the second sentence of the description on the page you have linked.


There is always a risk on non standard pin map used.

Anyways, received the Adafruit, as long as the center pin is positive on the DC side it works fine.

Thanks


----------



## Fugue

My Qutest arrived today, and I was most horrified to hear DSD files turned to complete fuzz with either JRiver MC24 or Audirvana 3+ on my HP laptop.I have DSD Bitstreaming turned on in JRiver, and I'm using the ASIO Chord 1.05 driver. All seems well when I look at the settings. I then tried my MacBook Pro with the Mac versions of that same software, and it plays DSD just fine. (The sample rate window glows white, so I assume I'm getting true DSD.) I'd like to make the HP work since it's fairly new, but I'm thrilled with the sound of the Qutest with my Mac!


----------



## lespaul84

Hi all, I was following the forum for a while and wanted to join the discussion with couple of questions. I have my Chord Qutest more than 1 year now and I am amazed with it. I am feeding it with a Raspberry Pi 4 through USB and using an Audioquest carbon usb cable.
Recently I tried ferrite chokes on the digital cable and also on power cables and I must say the bas became tighter and low end improved, brightness reduced. I am pleased with how it sounds. 
I am wondering how much sound quality improvement I could get if I add a hat to raspberry pi 4 instead of connecting it through USB. I already have a good quality usb cable imho, so I doubt if i could have an improvement. And I think I should also invest on either toslink or coax cable if I want to add a hat.

On the other hand, I am considering a Bluesound Node 2i but again I also need to invest for the cable. Which cables do you use to connect Node 2i to your Qutest? Should I expect a sound quality improvement if I switch from Pi to Node 2i? And by how much, does it for the money?

Highly appreciated for your thoughts.


----------



## uzi2

lespaul84 said:


> Hi all, I was following the forum for a while and wanted to join the discussion with couple of questions. I have my Chord Qutest more than 1 year now and I am amazed with it. I am feeding it with a Raspberry Pi 4 through USB and using an Audioquest carbon usb cable.
> Recently I tried ferrite chokes on the digital cable and also on power cables and I must say the bas became tighter and low end improved, brightness reduced. I am pleased with how it sounds.
> I am wondering how much sound quality improvement I could get if I add a hat to raspberry pi 4 instead of connecting it through USB. I already have a good quality usb cable imho, so I doubt if i could have an improvement. And I think I should also invest on either toslink or coax cable if I want to add a hat.
> 
> ...


The Pi4 is capable of great results feeding the Qutest. The biggest improvement I found was using an LPS with supercaps as I'm sure the standard Pi switching power supply injects some RF noise. What software are you using on the Pi4? I have DietPi running at low processor speeds. Are you using it for HQPlayer or another music player?
The general advice on ferrites is to keep adding more until you can hear no difference...


----------



## alxw0w

lespaul84 said:


> Hi all, I was following the forum for a while and wanted to join the discussion with couple of questions. I have my Chord Qutest more than 1 year now and I am amazed with it. I am feeding it with a Raspberry Pi 4 through USB and using an Audioquest carbon usb cable.
> Recently I tried ferrite chokes on the digital cable and also on power cables and I must say the bas became tighter and low end improved, brightness reduced. I am pleased with how it sounds.
> I am wondering how much sound quality improvement I could get if I add a hat to raspberry pi 4 instead of connecting it through USB. I already have a good quality usb cable imho, so I doubt if i could have an improvement. And I think I should also invest on either toslink or coax cable if I want to add a hat.
> 
> ...


Try optical connection using Hifiberry digi+pro. Sound should improve even further: less "harshness" calmer sound, less fatigue.


----------



## lespaul84

Hi both, thank you for the advice. 
I am using moodeaudio because for me it was the best sounding one. I installed LMS on it, I use it both with Tidal through mconnect and ipeng for LMS. Means -> I stream.

I have ifi low noise power supply connected to Pi 4 because I tought it my be better to eliminate the noise from the source. Not sure if it would be better if i connect the Ifi to qutest.

anyone can make a suggestion for optical cable? Any low budget would work or should I invest a hundred bucks?


----------



## DJJEZ

lespaul84 said:


> Hi both, thank you for the advice.
> I am using moodeaudio because for me it was the best sounding one. I installed LMS on it, I use it both with Tidal through mconnect and ipeng for LMS. Means -> I stream.
> 
> I have ifi low noise power supply connected to Pi 4 because I tought it my be better to eliminate the noise from the source. Not sure if it would be better if i connect the Ifi to qutest.
> ...


Lifatec optical cables

http://www.lifatec.com/toslink2.html


----------



## domi

Does everyone just leave their Qutest on all the time?


----------



## DJJEZ

domi said:


> Does everyone just leave their Qutest on all the time?


There is no off button so yes


----------



## domi

DJJEZ said:


> There is no off button so yes



Makes sense


----------



## uzi2

domi said:


> Does everyone just leave their Qutest on all the time?


I use an inline on/off button


----------



## Quince

domi said:


> Does everyone just leave their Qutest on all the time?


I turn the power conditioner off every night.


----------



## domi (Apr 21, 2021)

I noticed if I start playing a song when my amp is off/muted, the Qutest starts making something like static noise. I don't mean noise coming from headphones, I mean very audible, static-like noise coming from the Qutest itself.

It stops when I turn on the amp. Is this normal?


----------



## The Jester

I turn off the power conditioner when I’m going out for the day, or longer otherwise on 24/7


----------



## Triode User

domi said:


> Does everyone just leave their Qutest on all the time?


Yes, I leave mine on 24/7. In fact in the same system I also leave on 24/7 the Musical Fidelity amp and Innuos streamer.

in a different system I leave on 24/7 my Dave and MScaler together with the Antipodes K50. The power amps get turned off because they are big class A monoblocs and use significant electricity.


----------



## Chop-Top

domi said:


> Does everyone just leave their Qutest on all the time?


I unplug my entire system after use.  Don't want to have to replace due to power surge.


----------



## domi (Apr 22, 2021)

domi said:


> I noticed if I start playing a song when my amp is off/muted, the Qutest starts making something like static noise. I don't mean noise coming from headphones, I mean very audible, static-like noise coming from the Qutest itself.
> 
> It stops when I turn on the amp. Is this normal?



This is really strange, I just figured out that it's actually the song playing from the Qutest as if the Qutest itself has small speakers! The sound is very distorted.

@Rob Watts is this expected?


----------



## ra990

domi said:


> This is really strange, I just figured out that it's actually the song playing from the Qutest as if the Qutest itself has small speakers! The sound is very distorted.
> 
> @Rob Watts is this expected?


Hahaha, this is too funny. I've never heard anything out of the Qutest, it's always been silent. I wonder where this sound is coming from? Are you absolutely sure it's the Qutest? Can you make a quick video or something to share?


----------



## domi (Apr 22, 2021)

ra990 said:


> Hahaha, this is too funny. I've never heard anything out of the Qutest, it's always been silent. I wonder where this sound is coming from? Are you absolutely sure it's the Qutest? Can you make a quick video or something to share?



Here's a short video: https://1drv.ms/v/s!Ap6PjUw7458BlfZg0oSfuaFKVIy13g?e=jIivTM

So this doesn't happen to you when your amp is turned off or muted and you start playing a song?

I'm using Roon with a Raspberry Pi. I also tried connecting the Qutest directly to my Macbook and same thing happens. I'm puzzled.


----------



## ra990

domi said:


> Here's a short video: https://1drv.ms/v/s!Ap6PjUw7458BlfZg0oSfuaFKVIy13g?e=jIivTM
> 
> So this doesn't happen to you when your amp is turned off or muted and you start playing a song?
> 
> I'm using Roon with a Raspberry Pi. I also tried connecting the Qutest directly to my Macbook and same thing happens. I'm puzzled.


Definitely not. I don't have a Qutest right now, but I've had plenty of time with them and, like I said, dead silent. If you're up for it, try connecting just a simple USB power bank/battery that you might have lying around to it instead of whatever power supply you're using. If it does the same, then your Qutest definitely needs repair, otherwise it's something to do with your power supply and I would recommend just using a battery or a different PS.


----------



## domi

ra990 said:


> Definitely not. I don't have a Qutest right now, but I've had plenty of time with them and, like I said, dead silent. If you're up for it, try connecting just a simple USB power bank/battery that you might have lying around to it instead of whatever power supply you're using. If it does the same, then your Qutest definitely needs repair, otherwise it's something to do with your power supply and I would recommend just using a battery or a different PS.


Using a battery pack didn't make a change but I think I found why it's happening, it's my amp (Feliks Echo 2).

The Qutest stopped making that noise when I disconnected it from the Echo. So I tried connecting the Qutest to my solid state amp and it was dead silent. I have no idea why this is happening with the Echo, though.


----------



## uzi2

domi said:


> Using a battery pack didn't make a change but I think I found why it's happening, it's my amp (Feliks Echo 2).
> 
> The Qutest stopped making that noise when I disconnected it from the Echo. So I tried connecting the Qutest to my solid state amp and it was dead silent. I have no idea why this is happening with the Echo, though.


Could it be why they named it Echo?


----------



## domi

uzi2 said:


> Could it be why they named it Echo?


Haha I hope that's not the case


----------



## miketlse

uzi2 said:


> Could it be why they named it Echo?


Many a true word spoken in jest.
I suspect some additional feedback from other owners could be illuminating.


----------



## antdroid

I saw some scattered comments regarding this issue on this thread and other forums but dont know if this was ever resolved or addressed ---

I am using Qutest with USB ASIO driver 1.05 and any time I send a 768kbps signal to it, theres a good likelihood it will immediately or eventually start getting static noise on the right channel (typically). At first I thought it could be a HQPlayer thing, but I tried various filters and all had issue as soon as I used 768. It also occurs at 705 though more randomly. I also tried Roon's built-in upscaling at 768 and it also immediately goes to static.

Interestingly, on my less powerful Celeron 4125 roon server as the USB source, it happens less frequently. On my more powerful desktop Intel Canyon Hades I7 8th Gen + 16GB RAM, it happens immediately. I had thought it was perhaps a CPU spike issue with the lower processor, but it happens more often on my much more powerful main PC.

This seems to only be an issue at the higher frequency rate, and not at anything below this.


----------



## Hooster

In case this has not been posted before I can highly recommend this:



A very mature and complete review and discussion. I found it very useful.


----------



## miketlse

antdroid said:


> I saw some scattered comments regarding this issue on this thread and other forums but dont know if this was ever resolved or addressed ---
> 
> I am using Qutest with USB ASIO driver 1.05 and any time I send a 768kbps signal to it, theres a good likelihood it will immediately or eventually start getting static noise on the right channel (typically). At first I thought it could be a HQPlayer thing, but I tried various filters and all had issue as soon as I used 768. It also occurs at 705 though more randomly. I also tried Roon's built-in upscaling at 768 and it also immediately goes to static.
> 
> ...


Try testing the latency settings of both your computers, using DPC or similar.
Maybe your most powerful PC, needs its settings fine tuning, to ensure no pauses in the data flow at 768kps.


----------



## antdroid

miketlse said:


> Try testing the latency settings of both your computers, using DPC or similar.
> Maybe your most powerful PC, needs its settings fine tuning, to ensure no pauses in the data flow at 768kps.



I thought that could be an issue, but doesn't seem like it.  Thanks for the links to these tools though!


----------



## elira

domi said:


> Here's a short video: https://1drv.ms/v/s!Ap6PjUw7458BlfZg0oSfuaFKVIy13g?e=jIivTM
> 
> So this doesn't happen to you when your amp is turned off or muted and you start playing a song?
> 
> I'm using Roon with a Raspberry Pi. I also tried connecting the Qutest directly to my Macbook and same thing happens. I'm puzzled.


Stop doing that, it’s very likely that your amp is shorting its inputs. You can damage your qutest.


----------



## domi

elira said:


> Stop doing that, it’s very likely that your amp is shorting its inputs. You can damage your qutest.


Yes I agree, I haven't used the Echo with the Qutest after I posted here and I decided that the best thing to do is returning the amp to avoid damage to the Qutest.


----------



## beemarman

Can anyone advise on what powerpack\Battery to get for the Qutest?
I'm based in the UK.


----------



## Quince

domi said:


> Yes I agree, I haven't used the Echo with the Qutest after I posted here and I decided that the best thing to do is returning the amp to avoid damage to the Qutest.


I used Aukey pack. And they worked as expected


----------



## hakunamakaka

I've finally upgraded my dac and blown away so far with the improvements that Qutest brought to the table. Few questions fort owners: does PSU upgrade makes a difference as I see it being mentioned across different forums ? Chord is connected via usb to my macbook, I'm non believer in cables, but I'm not sure if USB port from macbook air is not noisy


----------



## beemarman

hakunamakaka said:


> I've finally upgraded my dac and blown away so far with the improvements that Qutest brought to the table. Few questions fort owners: does PSU upgrade makes a difference as I see it being mentioned across different forums ? Chord is connected via usb to my macbook, I'm non believer in cables, but I'm not sure if USB port from macbook air is not noisy


I'm using the Sbooster BOTW ECO MKII for my Qutest and I can hear a big difference compared to the normal power supply.


----------



## hakunamakaka

beemarman said:


> I'm using the Sbooster BOTW ECO MKII for my Qutest and I can hear a big difference compared to the normal power supply.



Ooof another 300Euros....But if the difference is easily felt than it is worth it for such dac.. How about inputs on Qutest ? I know they can make a difference...did anyone had a chance to test USB/Optical&BNC ?


----------



## Jon L

beemarman said:


> I'm using the Sbooster BOTW ECO MKII for my Qutest and I can hear a big difference compared to the normal power supply.


In what direction does Sbooster change the sound from stock smps?  Does Sbooster make sound...brighter/darker, denser/lighter, more forward/laid back, more/less bass, midrange more detailed/smoother, etc?


----------



## technobear

hakunamakaka said:


> Ooof another 300Euros....But if the difference is easily felt than it is worth it for such dac.. How about inputs on Qutest ? I know they can make a difference...did anyone had a chance to test USB/Optical&BNC ?


Your money (actually a lot less of it) would be better spent on one of these:

https://ifi-audio.com/products/ipurifier3/


----------



## hakunamakaka (May 6, 2021)

Jon L said:


> In what direction does Sbooster change the sound from stock smps?  Does Sbooster make sound...brighter/darker, denser/lighter, more forward/laid back, more/less bass, midrange more detailed/smoother, etc?



I know that SBAF is a bit bias forum, but they will smash to the ground non schiit based dacs if they wont sound at least decent.

This got my attention regards PSU on Qutest --> https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/chord-qutest-impressions.6398/page-2

Regards USB purifier I can see that my usb cable won't be able to connect to it. It has square based input. 
That's why I have an interest in other inputs if optical audio out/in is better than usb interface I could think of another source instead of my mac


----------



## beemarman

Jon L said:


> In what direction does Sbooster change the sound from stock smps?  Does Sbooster make sound...brighter/darker, denser/lighter, more forward/laid back, more/less bass, midrange more detailed/smoother, etc?


I would say darker compared to the original PS. Improved detail, more spacious and less fatigue as well. In fact, I sold my TT2 because I really couldn't tell the difference between using the Qutest with the Sbooster PS and the TT2. I'm going to use the money saved for other things.


----------



## antdroid

I only got the qutest more recently. I read through a good chunk of this thread, and was kinda skeptical about the power supply stuff.

I actually originally just used a usb cable with a phone charger connected to my Power Conditioner unit. It sounded pretty good. A few weeks later I finally dug out the included power cable which I just put away because it didnt really fit my power unit very well (takes up extra space because its a block). Immediately I noticed that the stock power supply was brighter sounding and, to me, not as enjoyable. 

I then got a linear power supply unit (just a generic one on amazon), and have been using that now. I don't know if it sounds any different than my Samsung cable + samsung charger, but I am getting a little less white noise issues with it, though it still occurs when using upscaled 768KHz sampling.


----------



## iFi audio

hakunamakaka said:


> I know that SBAF is a bit bias forum, but they will smash to the ground non schiit based dacs if they wont sound at least decent.



Naah, they're not that scary


----------



## hakunamakaka (May 7, 2021)

I’ve done some reading and seems that chord qutest is easily impacted by ground loop noise using USB/SPDIF inputs. That would explain why people report better sound  using linear power supplies/USB purifiers...As I've got lots of devices on my workstation, the best route would be to build an audio streamer with tosling port to connect with Qutest.

Even though Qutest was a big step up from my previous DAC, I do hear buzz sometimes. I really don't think my Macbooks USB output does enough justice for Qutest and can easily introduce RF noise. As my main source of music is laptop via USB, I've ordered Denafrips IRIS will report if it will make any difference.


----------



## imightbewrong

Hi DAC Experts.  I had a Chord DAC64 many moons ago and looking to get back into having a Chord DAC again as part of a wide HiFi upgrade.   Just wondering what the general thoughts were on going for something like the Qutest vs. spending similar ish money on a used TT?  Very happy to go second hand but I don't know where current gen vs previous gen Chord DACs sit relative to each other.  Thanks for any insight.


----------



## mammal

imightbewrong said:


> Hi DAC Experts. I had a Chord DAC64 many moons ago and looking to get back into having a Chord DAC again as part of a wide HiFi upgrade. Just wondering what the general thoughts were on going for something like the Qutest vs. spending similar ish money on a used TT? Very happy to go second hand but I don't know where current gen vs previous gen Chord DACs sit relative to each other. Thanks for any insight.


I used to own Hugo 2, which I believe has the same DAC as Qutest. There was a jump in quality when going to TT2, but for me, it would not matter as much. It was TT2’s power output that I needed. So, what is your overal budget and how much of it goes towards an amplifier? If you already have one, Qutest may be fine. If you are also trying to find an amplifier, consider TT2, fulfilling that need.


----------



## The Jester

Depends on usage and the other gear you already have,
main use headphones … go with the TT ,
opposite like me, speaker based system, ….basic Qutest DAC 
I use headphones occasionally but already have a good valve headphone amp …


----------



## imightbewrong

mammal said:


> I used to own Hugo 2, which I believe has the same DAC as Qutest. There was a jump in quality when going to TT2, but for me, it would not matter as much. It was TT2’s power output that I needed. So, what is your overal budget and how much of it goes towards an amplifier? If you already have one, Qutest may be fine. If you are also trying to find an amplifier, consider TT2, fulfilling that need.





The Jester said:


> Depends on usage and the other gear you already have,
> main use headphones … go with the TT ,
> opposite like me, speaker based system, ….basic Qutest DAC
> I use headphones occasionally but already have a good valve headphone amp …



Thanks both - I will have a separate amplifier so headphone amp not needed though would be a small bonus.  Main interest is in the DAC duty.

Budget - up to about £1.5K not a problem.  If the TT2 was a huge step up at £3k-£3.5K used would consider it - but if all that money is really going into the headphone am/pre-amp and the DAC is not leaps and bounds better then I wouldn't bother.


----------



## mammal

imightbewrong said:


> Budget - up to about £1.5K not a problem. If the TT2 was a huge step up at £3k-£3.5K used would consider it - but if all that money is really going into the headphone am/pre-amp and the DAC is not leaps and bounds better then I wouldn't bother.


There is an improvement in DAC quality of course. But as you said, HTT2 is also a good AMP and if you do not need it (already have one) I think you will be happy with Qutest.


----------



## RobertSM (May 15, 2021)

I had the TT2 for a few weeks on loan from a dealer to audition and really loved it. I think that audition sold me on the Chord brand and the style of DACs they produce.

However when it came time for me to upgrade my DAC I went with a Qutest. As much as I really liked the TT2, I didn't need the headphone amp/pre-amp features that the TT2 provided. I already owned a few very high quality headphone amps, both solid-state and tube designs. I think as a pure DAC the Qutest gets me nearly to the point of the TT2. Do I think the TT2 is better? Yes, no doubt. But the Qutest also saves me money and still allows me to enjoy the resolving sound that is common with the Chord DACs. So I think at the end of of day it's important to know what your needs are. Think about that components you already own and how you see yourself building your system.


----------



## HumanMedia

imightbewrong said:


> Hi DAC Experts.  I had a Chord DAC64 many moons ago and looking to get back into having a Chord DAC again as part of a wide HiFi upgrade.   Just wondering what the general thoughts were on going for something like the Qutest vs. spending similar ish money on a used TT?  Very happy to go second hand but I don't know where current gen vs previous gen Chord DACs sit relative to each other.  Thanks for any insight.


A TT or TT2?


----------



## The Jester

RobertSM said:


> I had the TT2 for a few weeks on loan from a dealer to audition and really loved it. I think that audition sold me on the Chord brand and the style of DACs they produce.
> 
> However when it came time for me to upgrade my DAC I went with a Qutest. As much as I really liked the TT2, I didn't need the headphone amp/pre-amp features that the TT2 provided. I already owned a few very high quality headphone amps, both solid-state and tube designs. I think as a pure DAC the Qutest gets me nearly to the point of the TT2. Do I think the TT2 is better? Yes, no doubt. But the Qutest also saves me money and still allows me to enjoy the resolving sound that is common with the Chord DACs. So I think at the end of of day it's important to know what your needs are. Think about that components you already own and how you see yourself build your system.


Things could’ve been different with an unlimited budget but in the real world for most of us we have to make choices, I auditioned the Dave, TT2 and Qutest at my dealer, initially with both systems matching mine and systems approaching “Lottery win only” and the Dave stood out with an incremental gap to the TT2 and Qutest, second session was using only my Stax headphones, naturally with their own driver/amp and the gap between the 3 DAC’s narrowed, at my dealers suggestion I tried various quality headphones that were available on both the TT2 and Dave and while sounding really good nothing was an “improvement” on the Qutest/Stax to my ears …, so then added the MScaler into the equation and everything changed again, short version is I ended up with the Qutest/MScaler … sound quality I never expected from digital and hooks straight into my existing system …
with the imaginary unlimited budget I’d naturally have chosen the Dave/MScaler and added the Huei phono stage for my Vinyl collection, then added a Chord power amp and suitably exotic speakers to go into my specially constructed listening room ….. if only .. 🤔


----------



## imightbewrong

HumanMedia said:


> A TT or TT2?



A new Qutest and used TT are similar money, so I was interested in comparing them. The TT2 is another level up at about 3x the price


----------



## antdroid

imightbewrong said:


> A new Qutest and used TT are similar money, so I was interested in comparing them. The TT2 is another level up at about 3x the price


If you care about the Taps (which is the selling point of Chord), the Qutest has nearly double the amount over the original Hugo TT.


----------



## BabetakCZE (May 18, 2021)

Is it safe for Qutest to use 5V 3A out from PSU (Allo Shanti) or is it better to use 5V 1A out?
Thanks.


----------



## mammal

BabetakCZE said:


> Is it safe for Qutest to use 5V 3A out from PSU (Allo Shanti)?


Make sure to consult Qutest's warranty. I know that for Hugo 2 and TT2 one can only use Chord's power supply, or else it voids warranty.


----------



## HumanMedia (May 17, 2021)

BabetakCZE said:


> Is it safe for Qutest to use 5V 3A out from PSU (Allo Shanti) or is it better to use 3V 1A out?
> Thanks.


*5v* as that is what it is rated for. 3v might not even work. Amps is irrelevant as long as it exceeds the minimum the device requires as it will draw what it needs. Don’t go above it’s rated voltage, don’t go below it’s rated amps.


----------



## BabetakCZE

Sorry, I meant 5V 1A.


----------



## technobear

BabetakCZE said:


> Is it safe for Qutest to use 5V 3A out from PSU (Allo Shanti) or is it better to use 5V 1A out?
> Thanks.


No difference. The Qutest will take only as much current as it needs. The 5V is the important part. I seem to recall Qutest uses about 0.6A. It's in this thread somewhere.


----------



## uzi2 (May 18, 2021)

BabetakCZE said:


> Is it safe for Qutest to use 5V 3A out from PSU (Allo Shanti) or is it better to use 5V 1A out?
> Thanks.


It will draw the current it requires, so either is safe, but 1A is sufficient. I use the 3A for my Pi4.


----------



## hakunamakaka

Anyone using laptop as a source for music via usb to qutest I can recommend to add USB D/D converter. While I felt an improvement with qutest against my budget dac, Usb d/d converter made it even better, qutest now gives better control in bass, doesn’t sound bright at all and layering is even more better. I bought the cheapest denafrips iris and it was well worth it. I was non believer in such things for data transmission, but it is what it is. I think laptop usb introduces noise to this dac and guys replacing psu on qutest tackles the same issue.


----------



## Nikonkit

I hate to flog an old horse but I dig out my old mojo which saw very little light of day after I brought the qutest out these few days and connected it to my tube amp, the mojo although not as wide and detailed as the qutest certainly help its own being warmer, lusher and made the human voice sounded more pleasing, the qutest's vocals were thinner and has less body, has anyone noticed this or is it because I am going deaf in my old age


----------



## TechnoJazz

Hello!
This is my first post on this forum, even though I have been reading it with attention.

After some consideration I decided to buy the Chord Qutest. I immediately loved the sound of the Qutest but I also found a couple of issues that are really annoying and I would like to know if anyone noticed them too. Please forgive me if this was already mentioned but I could not find detailed info about it.

I am using the USB connection to a Raspberry PI4.0B with Volumio but I also tried it connected to my laptop via USB and JRiver and these issues happens equally. On the PI4.0B I also tried MoOde with the same results:

1. When starting playing DSD files there is a click noise. If I let the album run, the following files do not click. But if I manually select file after file (even within the same album) the DSD files will also click in the beginning.

2.Apart from the clicks If I play a DSD file it plays the music for the very beginning. While playing this file, if I select another DSD file from another album, it also plays the song from the very beginning.
However, if I am playing a 24/192 file, for example, and I click on a DSD file it cuts part of the first note, like if it was fading up. It is only noticeable if the track starts with an attack sound like a drum sound, for example.

I really appreciate your comments based on your knowledge and experience. I really like the Chor Qutest but if this is the normal behavior I find it not acceptable and I will need to find an alternative.

Thank you


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 6, 2021)

@TechnoJazz

Can you run from optical from the Pi to Qutest. ... I am sure I read somewhere that this issue only happens over USB.

Having said that, this issue is fixed when using Windows driver. It must be the operating system of the Pi. [The issue was present over USB with the Mojo, which was before the Qutest.]

Does your music player have a setting for insterting 'one second (or half a second) of silence to allow for hardware synchronisation?'. That is what the issue is; hardware synchronisation.

I woudl say look at your media player settings. Or use optical. Or maybe even try a USB to optical converter, so Qutest receives optical.


----------



## TechnoJazz

@GreenBow 

Thank you for replying.
I can't run Optical from the RPI4 (only USB) and the Qutest only accept DSD  in USB, in optical it is limited  to 96kHz.

Volumio or MoOde on the RPI4 do not have that setting for hardware synchronization but JRiver in Windows has that setting and both issues happen as with the RPI4, so I think that is not fixed with that setting.

And related with #1 - the clicks with DSD files?

If these are known issues from previous models and still without a solution on the Qutest I will consider to return it.

Perhaps someone has more info about this?


----------



## Danygo

Newbie Audiophile here.

Bought a used a Chord Qutest a couple of weeks ago. And today I was A/B testing my old modi 2 dac with the qutest. Thing is that my amp, a Feliks Espressivo mk2 has 3 sets of RCA pairs in the back so you can plug up to 3 different sources in.

After having some fun testing music, i went to unplug my old modi 2, sat back down and I found the sound coming out of my Qutest DAC coming out with very low volume and very distorted. After troubleshooting my amp, cables and switching back to my old modi 2, it turned out that the dac that was damaged and not my amp. To me it feels like the RCA outputs of my dac are somehow damaged because the unit itself works normally, turns on, boots correctly and the sight glass' color will change according to what file is being played

I think it's worth mentioning that while unplugging the modi 2's rca interconnect, the pins touched the golden plated rca port on my amp for my qutest. Also, when I was A/B testing and whad the modi 2 selected, I could hear the qutest output while it was still selected in windows, not sure if it was the dacs or my amp picking up inputs from other rca ports. Is there anyway I could repair this or fix it? really sucks to have 1500$ blown away after two weeks of use with the qutest and now have to revert to a modius I have laying around


----------



## antdroid

wrote a set of impressions of my qutest here: https://www.audiodiscourse.com/2021/06/chord-qutest-impressions.html


----------



## antdroid

Danygo said:


> Newbie Audiophile here.
> 
> Bought a used a Chord Qutest a couple of weeks ago. And today I was A/B testing my old modi 2 dac with the qutest. Thing is that my amp, a Feliks Espressivo mk2 has 3 sets of RCA pairs in the back so you can plug up to 3 different sources in.
> 
> ...



Does turning it off and then back on fix the issue?


----------



## Danygo (Jun 6, 2021)

antdroid said:


> Does turning it off and then back on fix the issue?


No, tried using the default power supply ( I've been using an ifi iPowerX 5v, no issues till today), using a macbook as source, different sets of rca cables, different rca ports on my feliks amp, voltage startup at 1v,2v and 3v, leaving it alone for hours and tried using a schiit magnius for an amp. At this point I'm convinced that either my  feliks amp either fried the rca ports on my qutest or I somehow managed to touch something metallic with the rca interconnects being connected to the dac. If it was my amp frying the rca ports then I don't know what the store where I bought it from can do about it. Oh by the way,  fiddling with the volume past 12' o clock I can hear some sort of hissing, can best describe it as swiping your finger across your skin, other dacs I have laying around don't do this on this amp.


----------



## Nikonkit

Danygo said:


> No, tried using the default power supply ( I've been using an ifi iPowerX 5v, no issues till today), using a macbook as source, different sets of rca cables, different rca ports on my feliks amp, voltage startup at 1v,2v and 3v, leaving it alone for hours and tried using a schiit magnius for an amp. At this point I'm convinced that either my  feliks amp either fried the rca ports on my qutest or I somehow managed to touch something metallic with the rca interconnects being connected to the dac. If it was my amp frying the rca ports then I don't know what the store where I bought it from can do about it. Oh by the way,  fiddling with the volume past 12' o clock I can hear some sort of hissing, can best describe it as swiping your finger across your skin, other dacs I have laying around don't do this on this amp.


Does the iPower make a difference when you connect it against the power supply that came with the unit?


----------



## Danygo

Nikonkit said:


> Does the iPower make a difference when you connect it against the power supply that came with the unit?


Nope


----------



## Danygo (Jun 6, 2021)

I think I'll have to switch to another DAC if I were to get a replacement.


----------



## domi

Danygo said:


> Newbie Audiophile here.
> 
> Bought a used a Chord Qutest a couple of weeks ago. And today I was A/B testing my old modi 2 dac with the qutest. Thing is that my amp, a Feliks Espressivo mk2 has 3 sets of RCA pairs in the back so you can plug up to 3 different sources in.
> 
> ...


I didn't have the low/distorted volume issue but I had the same "sound coming from the Qutest even when it's not selected" issue with my Qutest and a Feliks Echo 2. It only happened with the Feliks, my other amps (Schiit Asgard 3 back then and ZMF Pendant OG now) worked without issues. It seems like Feliks amps are not disabling the input when the input is muted or not selected.

Do you have another amp that you can try the Qutest with?


----------



## Danygo

domi said:


> I didn't have the low/distorted volume issue but I had the same "sound coming from the Qutest even when it's not selected" issue with my Qutest and a Feliks Echo 2. It only happened with the Feliks, my other amps (Schiit Asgard 3 back then and ZMF Pendant OG now) worked without issues. It seems like Feliks amps are not disabling the input when the input is muted or not selected.
> 
> Do you have another amp that you can try the Qutest with?


I have a magnius and a magni 2 laying around, but the distortion and low volume is present, if not worse on those amps than the feliks. I just found out that a warranty transfer between owners is possible, since I bought it used from ebay. Maybe I'll have to go with that since so far it looks like a hardware issue


----------



## technobear

Danygo said:


> I have a magnius and a magni 2 laying around, but the distortion and low volume is present, if not worse on those amps than the feliks. I just found out that a warranty transfer between owners is possible, since I bought it used from ebay. Maybe I'll have to go with that since so far it looks like a hardware issue


This doesn't sound like a problem with the Qutest. If you are feeding the Qutest a signal then it will play it and output analogue sound. It won't stop just because the amp hasn't selected it. How would it know? From what you have written, it sounds like all your amps have poor input crosstalk.


----------



## ctrlm

BabetakCZE said:


> Is it safe for Qutest to use 5V 3A out from PSU (Allo Shanti) or is it better to use 5V 1A out?
> Thanks.


Perfectly safe. Unlike voltage, higher than needed amperage is irrelevant as the Chord or any other electronic device will only draw the amps it needs.


----------



## GreenBow

TechnoJazz said:


> @GreenBow
> 
> Thank you for replying.
> I can't run Optical from the RPI4 (only USB) and the Qutest only accept DSD  in USB, in optical it is limited  to 96kHz.
> ...



I have Windows and JRiver.

The issue of losing the first half second, should not happen with Windows. I have added and removed the hardware sync second with JRiver. ..... The only thing I can think of is that you have not installed the right USB driver from Chord's website.

The clicks I think are from the same issue. From what I am told, without hardware sync, you get clicks, pops, and beeps.   

However I know nothing of DSD, so I can't advise with that. I think your best bet is email Chord, or @ Rob Watts here on head-fi. (Without space between @ and Rob Watts.)


----------



## TechnoJazz

GreenBow said:


> I have Windows and JRiver.
> 
> The issue of losing the first half second, should not happen with Windows. I have added and removed the hardware sync second with JRiver. ..... The only thing I can think of is that you have not installed the right USB driver from Chord's website.
> 
> ...



I am sorry, but I got confused. Are you saying that the issues I mentioned, mostly related with DSD are solved in Windows/JRiver? Or you only used PCM files?

Nevertheless I want to use a streamer and not the desktop JRiver.


----------



## OG10

Hello Gents, 

What is the easiest and most economic way of getting Air Play 2 added to the Qutest?


----------



## mammal

OG10 said:


> What is the easiest and most economic way of getting Air Play 2 added to the Qutest?


I know of two options, adding a Raspberry Pi 4 with software called shairport-sync, or buy some officially licensed implementation, like Bluesound Node 2i


----------



## mdcworks

OG10 said:


> Hello Gents,
> 
> What is the easiest and most economic way of getting Air Play 2 added to the Qutest?


Easiest is to buy a second hand apple AirPort express and use its optical out to qutest


----------



## GreenBow (Jun 9, 2021)

TechnoJazz said:


> I am sorry, but I got confused. Are you saying that the issues I mentioned, mostly related with DSD are solved in Windows/JRiver? Or you only used PCM files?
> 
> Nevertheless I want to use a streamer and not the desktop JRiver.



I don't have any DSD files.

(I think I read that Chord DACs convert DSD to PCM. I am not sure though, so check that.)

If you have Windows and install the Chord driver, the issue should be gone. (At the least, you can add a second of silence for hardware sync.)


I think your issue is because you use can't use a Windows driver with a non-Windows based streamer. However I can't say that is what the issue is, because I don't know. That is why I said email chord or address a post to Rob Watts.


It is strange though because a lot of people use streamers, but I have never heard of this issue before. Maybe it's because you are using DSD and USB, but I don't know.


Alternatively, you could ask in the Hugo 2 thread, TT2 thread, DAVE thread, or Mojo thread. Since I see DSD mentioned sometimes, then someone is likely to be able to help you. The other Chord DACs I mentioned work on the same principle, so you can ask in those threads.


----------



## HumanMedia

OG10 said:


> Hello Gents,
> 
> What is the easiest and most economic way of getting Air Play 2 added to the Qutest?


My streamer (opticalRendu) has an AirPlay app you download and use. I’m guessing other streamers do too.


----------



## HumanMedia (Jun 13, 2021)

TechnoJazz said:


> @GreenBow
> 
> Thank you for replying.
> I can't run Optical from the RPI4 (only USB) and the Qutest only accept DSD  in USB, in optical it is limited  to 96kHz.
> ...


I noticed this with my streamer when playing a DSD track when a PCM track was already playing and vice versa. In my players settings I put in a  delay of 2000 milliseconds when swapping data types. I also put the same value in for when it plays different sampling rates of PCM even though I didn’t notice it there. Haven’t noticed it since.


----------



## mynamesjeff

Hey everyone, sorry if this has been answered before but what is everyones recommendation for a portable powerbank  for the qutest? Is it recommended at all? Too many choices have left me all confused


----------



## Quince

mynamesjeff said:


> Hey everyone, sorry if this has been answered before but what is everyones recommendation for a portable powerbank  for the qutest? Is it recommended at all? Too many choices have left me all confused


I was happy with the Anker Powercore+ Before I moved to an Sbooster PSU.


----------



## mynamesjeff

Quince said:


> I was happy with the Anker Powercore+ Before I moved to an Sbooster PSU.


thanks mate. would something like this suffice? https://www.amazon.com.au/Anker-Pow...ocphy=1000286&hvtargid=pla-366401406373&psc=1

Will it be the equivalent of the PSU that comes with the Qutest or potentially be better?


----------



## Quince

mynamesjeff said:


> thanks mate. would something like this suffice? https://www.amazon.com.au/Anker-Powercore-Portable-Ultra-High-Capacity-Recharges/dp/B01N3TVRP2/ref=asc_df_B01N3TVRP2/?tag=googleshopdsk-22&linkCode=df0&hvadid=341792385110&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=2986784602627495247&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&


That is the one I have. To my ears better everything compared to the he stock PSU.


----------



## albarot

Does anybody listen to the qutest with the topping A90 and could share their opinion.
I really like the A90 switch in front and preamp, but i hate the gustard X16 that i have currently. And i was thinking upgrading to the qutest, mainly for soundstage and musicality.


----------



## vonspanky

I'm thinking of replacing my Zen Dac with the Chord Qutest (I'll use my Zen Can as the amp). As I mainly listen to Tidal/MQA am I correct in thinking that there will still be a big lift in detail and clarity over the Zen Dac?


----------



## mynamesjeff

Has anyone had to replace their rubber feet on their Qutest. I bought mine used and its missing 3 feet. Wondering if anyone has found any replacements online


----------



## The Jester

Don’t look like anything too special, some self adhesive polyurethane or sorbathane furniture protectors from the local hardware would do the job …
Online from say Amazon there would be a range of equipment feet from a few dollars to hundreds of dollars ….. each … 😳


----------



## The Jester

There’s also the genuine Chord Qutest stand system for a “mere” $395 ?? … 😳


----------



## mynamesjeff

The Jester said:


> There’s also the genuine Chord Qutest stand system for a “mere” $395 ?? … 😳


lol that's a bit cooked


----------



## u2u2

The Jester said:


> There’s also the genuine Chord Qutest stand system for a “mere” $395 ?? … 😳


You probably need the stock feet to locate the unit in the stand. They have to be audiophile grade...
Wonder how hot the unit got to get the feet to come off or how much solvent etc was used to clean it? Its not like a portable device and the feet even stay on MOJOs.
Any local hardware store, pharmacy etc probably has some stickies that will work for a buck.


----------



## Quince

I removed them from mine to fit taller and larger feet (I needed to clear the railings of the top-loading cd player in which the test was sitting). The original feet were very firmly stuck, took some pulling to remove them.


----------



## mynamesjeff

mynamesjeff said:


> Has anyone had to replace their rubber feet on their Qutest. I bought mine used and its missing 3 feet. Wondering if anyone has found any replacements online


Just to answer my own question. This worked 100% for me but I got rid of all the remaining feet that came with the Qutest and replaced them all with these. They fit perfectly in the divet/hole
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/114664419180?var=414829404429


----------



## Uguccione (Jul 26, 2021)

Hello everybody.
I had promised myself not to write anything until I had read the whole discussion, but - with all my best will - I got stuck on page. 120.
I am a new owner of this dac, purchased second hand, used for 6 months.
I'm not much of a dac expert having only had one many years ago (90s), so I don't have great terms of comparison.
The current headphone system is composed as follows: mini-pc with Daphile -> Qutest -> Microtzotl MZ2 -> Sennheiser HD800 (without S).
As soon as it was installed, I immediately noticed an aggressive and ringing sound. Going on with the listening the feeling did not change and I soon came to a listening fatigue that forced me to lower the volume to unsatisfactory levels.
At the time I thought that the dac had not been used enough and that it was still running in, or that the power supply (infamous ) was not up to par, etc ....
I then tried to use the filters: I immediately started with the red one, but the sound was too dark and the HD800 was as if they had transformed into the Audioquest Nighthawk (lol). With the orange filter I got the best result, but in the long run I still noticed a sound that tended to distort in the peaks.
At a certain point the light bulb came on: let me check the output voltage.
 ... and in fact the previous owner had left it set to 3 volts.
Lowered the level to 2V everything is linearized. Now I use the white filter (which would sound "nature" like mom did, if I don't get it wrong) and the sound has lost any aggression.
It remains a detailed (highly detailed) dac, but also smooth and refined. I wouldn't call it "analog", at least not as I remember it (but many years have passed since the last turntable).
I avoid saying the usual platitudes, that is, now I notice details that I did not notice before (but it is the truth).

The advice I can give (but will have already been given in abundance after almost 400 pages of discussion) is to choose the output voltage well, and to do it by ear.

P.S .: I tried to write as simply as possible to simplify the task for Google translate. I hope you understand something.


----------



## Uguccione

Black Panther (the effect of the Qutest lights on the wall. Will it be wanted?)


----------



## StarlightDawn (Jul 31, 2021)

I have just received my Chord Qutest, it is replacing the RME ADI-2 DAC FS. It's my first external DAC, and I will be pairing it with the Diana Phi + Formula S & Powerman. Looking forward to enjoying my music over the weekend with the Qutest doing its thing 

Ooh, I've also got one question. My XI Audio Formula S input sensitivity is rated at 1000mV, does this mean I should set the output of the Qutest to 1v instead of 2/3v?


----------



## jpneat

I just received a Qutest and also, based on recommendations here I added a Curious USB cable. I'm trying to stream using Roon from a rasberry pi through USB to the Qutest. When I use the cable it came with all works well and Roon sees the endpoint just fine, but when I plug in the Curious cable it doesn't see it. The Curious cable works fine when I plug it into my MacBook Pro and qutest and roon sees that combo right away. Any thoughts on why this may happen?


----------



## scottcocoabeach

StarlightDawn said:


> I have just received my Chord Qutest, it is replacing the RME ADI-2 DAC FS. It's my first external DAC, and I will be pairing it with the Diana Phi + Formula S & Powerman. Looking forward to enjoying my music over the weekend with the Qutest doing its thing
> 
> Ooh, I've also got one question. My XI Audio Formula S input sensitivity is rated at 1000mV, does this mean I should set the output of the Qutest to 1v instead of 2/3v?


Congratulations! If you are replacing your RME ADI-2 Dac than it's not your first external DAC.  Maybe you mean you weren't using the RME with a separate AMP? I think a lot of us here use the RME as an external DAC. The built in amplifier is okay but certainly not at the level of most external amps.

I just received my Chord Qutest today as well. I am comparing it with my RME ADI-2 FS DAC and Multibit Gumby. It doesn't sound like either of them, that's for sure. I'll be interested to see how I like it over time. I'll be interested to hear how you like it after you get some time with it. I don't have any plans to get rid of my other DACs at this point as they are all quite different from one another.


----------



## scottcocoabeach

jpneat said:


> I just received a Qutest and also, based on recommendations here I added a Curious USB cable. I'm trying to stream using Roon from a rasberry pi through USB to the Qutest. When I use the cable it came with all works well and Roon sees the endpoint just fine, but when I plug in the Curious cable it doesn't see it. The Curious cable works fine when I plug it into my MacBook Pro and qutest and roon sees that combo right away. Any thoughts on why this may happen?


Congrats on getting the Qutest. That seems like a strange problem, have you tried rebooting the PI with everything connected first? I sometimes need a reboot a device to get Roon to see my endpoints, especially if I updated or restarted the core.


----------



## Cekootje

I have two questions.

First of all, some time ago I got a heavily distorted sound from my setup. I suspect it came from the Qutest as I was trying out if a battery powered Qutest would sound better than the provided SMPS. So I switched power supply a couple of times. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Shutting everything off and on again and it was ok, but having experienced it a couple of times makes me think that something worse might occur in the near future.

Second question. My setup is now as following: iPad or Raspberry Pi -> Qutest -> Amp -> speakers or headphone. I want the absolute best power for my digital frontend so I’m playing with the thought of buying a NuPrime LPS that can power both the Qutest and the iPad or Raspi. Is that recommended? I know there’s already been said a lot about the use of LPS’s on this forum but I’m wondering if anyone has used any of these two-component serving powersupplies? I believe Silent Angel has one too in the same price category, also very nice looking device and at least gives the opportunity to switch the Qutest off somehow .


----------



## StarlightDawn

scottcocoabeach said:


> Congratulations! If you are replacing your RME ADI-2 Dac than it's not your first external DAC.  Maybe you mean you weren't using the RME with a separate AMP? I think a lot of us here use the RME as an external DAC. The built in amplifier is okay but certainly not at the level of most external amps.
> 
> I just received my Chord Qutest today as well. I am comparing it with my RME ADI-2 FS DAC and Multibit Gumby. It doesn't sound like either of them, that's for sure. I'll be interested to see how I like it over time. I'll be interested to hear how you like it after you get some time with it. I don't have any plans to get rid of my other DACs at this point as they are all quite different from one another.


 hahaha! yes that's what I meant, first time with a seperate amp  
Congratulations to you too on acquiring the Qutest!


----------



## Nikonkit

StarlightDawn said:


> I have just received my Chord Qutest, it is replacing the RME ADI-2 DAC FS. It's my first external DAC, and I will be pairing it with the Diana Phi + Formula S & Powerman. Looking forward to enjoying my music over the weekend with the Qutest doing its thing
> 
> Ooh, I've also got one question. My XI Audio Formula S input sensitivity is rated at 1000mV, does this mean I should set the output of the Qutest to 1v instead of 2/3v?


I hope you are keeping the RME ADI2 for a while, the Qutest is a different presentation, not necessarily a better dac, there really is room for both in my case.


----------



## StarlightDawn

Nikonkit said:


> I hope you are keeping the RME ADI2 for a while, the Qutest is a different presentation, not necessarily a better dac, there really is room for both in my case.


I've sold the RME, and yeah I agree.. it's worth to keep both. However, I find the Qutest to synergize better with the Diana Phi.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

StarlightDawn said:


> Ooh, I've also got one question. My XI Audio Formula S input sensitivity is rated at 1000mV, does this mean I should set the output of the Qutest to 1v instead of 2/3v?



Sagra is suppose to be the real pairing of Formula S. This DAC offer 1,4V at rca out and 4V with xlr out. 

3V from qutest is totally fine.


----------



## Another Audiophile

@Rob Watts can I use the power supply from the Qutest to charge the poly+mojo as one unit?


----------



## Rob Watts

I had no involvement with poly, so I don't know the charging requirements, but I suspect it would be fine.


----------



## sohho

the UltraCap supplied wallwort is rubish... feed it with a decent power supply... noise spreads trough the ground plane... the alternating circuit that switches caps banks every few seconds must have a common ground linking both banks... so, we are talking about the power supply of the power supply...


----------



## Nostoi

I'm thinking about exchanging my Hugo 2 for a Qutest, as I basically always use the Hugo 2 in desktop mode connected to an external amp. It's use as a portable device with Bluetooth is irrelevant to me.  I also prefer the form factor of the Qutest. 

Is there a general consensus on whether there's any kind of difference in timbre/tonality between Hugo 2 and Qutest? I know they use the same DAC, but I've read differing and conflicting reports about the tonal relationship between these units.


----------



## LCMusicLover (Aug 10, 2021)

I've seen a number of posts (both here and on the Hugo 2 thread) suggesting that Qutest ==> external amp beats Hugo 2 ==> external amp.

But I also see discussions regarding 'why?'  Main theories appear to be 'different output stage' and 'better USB galvanic isolation'.

And since I never connect my H2 to USB (always S/PDIF or Optical), I don't care about USB.  Which leads me to the question:

Is there a significant sound quality difference between H2 and Qutest when receiving optical or coax input?

TIA!  (cross-posting to Hugo 2 thread as well)

(I guess this is just a slightly different version of @Nostoi 's question above -- sorry for the redundancy).


----------



## Nostoi

Can a Qutest kindly owner do me a little favour? Would you mind measuring the distance between the two feet on the bottom of the unit please, as seen below? Thank you kindly.


----------



## elira

Nostoi said:


> Can a Qutest kindly owner do me a little favour? Would you mind measuring the distance between the two feet on the bottom of the unit please, as seen below? Thank you kindly.


13cm edge to edge.


----------



## Nostoi

elira said:


> 13cm edge to edge.


Perfect, thank you.


----------



## Oldbigears

LCMusicLover said:


> Is there a significant sound quality difference between H2 and Qutest when receiving optical or coax input?


Per chance...after thinking about this question for a long while last week I purchased a cheap $50 USB to SPDIF / Optical converter made by Douk Audio, which enables me to connect my OpticalRendu to my Qutest via optical.  The improvement in sound quality is truly astonishing in my system.  I was totally expecting a dead-heat, or at least a very close comparison.  But there is no comparison. I'll never go back to USB. And that's with just a simple $50 box from China.


----------



## LCMusicLover

Oldbigears said:


> Per chance...after thinking about this question for a long while last week I purchased a cheap $50 USB to SPDIF / Optical converter made by Douk Audio, which enables me to connect my OpticalRendu to my Qutest via optical.  The improvement in sound quality is truly astonishing in my system.  I was totally expecting a dead-heat, or at least a very close comparison.  But there is no comparison. I'll never go back to USB. And that's with just a simple $50 box from China.


Interesting but, unfortunately, doesn’t help me. Perhaps my question wasn’t clear. What I’m hoping to find out is how Qutest & Hugo 2 compare when NOT using USB input — meaning either optical or coax input.


----------



## Oldbigears

LCMusicLover said:


> Interesting but, unfortunately, doesn’t help me. Perhaps my question wasn’t clear. What I’m hoping to find out is how Qutest & Hugo 2 compare when NOT using USB input — meaning either optical or coax input.



That's what I'm saying....instead of oR --> USB --> Qutest (normal configuration), I've changed to oR -> USB --> Douk Audio-->Optical-->Qutest.  So I am avoiding the Qutest's USB input. Massive improvement.


----------



## Christer

Oldbigears said:


> That's what I'm saying....instead of oR --> USB --> Qutest (normal configuration), I've changed to oR -> USB --> Douk Audio-->Optical-->Qutest.  So I am avoiding the Qutest's USB input. Massive improvement.


Until I get to hear what the SRC-DX thing can do, my path with Qutest is usb into Mscaler and WAVE  Storm BNCs out from Mscaler. 
The only times in a couple of years that I have used my Qutest on its own via usb was while trying out PGGB.
Running Qutest on a battery powered PSU ,not stock, nor powerbank, and results in both cases, are good. 
Cheers CC


----------



## LCMusicLover

Oldbigears said:


> That's what I'm saying....instead of oR --> USB --> Qutest (normal configuration), I've changed to oR -> USB --> Douk Audio-->Optical-->Qutest.  So I am avoiding the Qutest's USB input. Massive improvement.


OK, one more time:

How does the sound of the Qutest compare to the sound of Hugo 2 when BOTH are NOT driven by USB?

Meaning I don't care about performance when playing from USB inputs, nor about how much sound quality improves when switching from USB input to Optical or Coax.


----------



## Nostoi

Anyone used the Keces P3 on their Qutest? Impressions if so?


----------



## Nostoi

Just got a Qutest which replaces my Hugo 2. For me, it's the sweet spot in the Chord canon, especially when paired with a TOTL amp. Is the TT2 "better"? Yes, of course, but not significantly IMO. 

Anyway, I'm looking to get at least try a couple of linear power supplies. I'm especially interested in the Farad Super3. Does anyone have an experience of this pairing?


----------



## Cekootje

I would really like to try different power supplies but I just doubt it will make any difference.


----------



## Nostoi

Cekootje said:


> I would really like to try different power supplies but I just doubt it will make any difference.


Yup it's last on my list of things to upgrade, but given there's so much ambiguity about whether it makes any difference, only solution is to hear for oneself. I also suspect it'll make little difference.


----------



## uzi2

I'm with it that it may make little difference to the Qutest, but mine is fed by a Pi4 and it sure makes a huge difference to that. I have the Shanti, so it powers both


----------



## Moonglum

Man it is so hard to decide between Ares II vs Qutest. Some consensus in reviews suggests the Ares II is warmer, more analog, presents instruments more lifelike, has bigger soundstage than Qutest, but less detail. But other reviewers say Qutest is the one that is more lifelike and that Qutest is much more detailed. Still others say Qutest sounds more obviously digital, while others say the reverse, that Qutest sounds LESS digital than Ares II. I have no chance of getting to audition both DACs in my home rig. Has anyone else actually managed to AvB the Ares II and Qutest ? Of course I have watched all the YT videos but as I said, some seem to say contradictory things so it becomes hard to know who to believe. Please don't suggest I compare Pontus II to Qutest as I can't stretch financially to a Pontus II.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

Moonglum said:


> Man it is so hard to decide between Ares II vs Qutest. Some consensus in reviews suggests the Ares II is warmer, more analog, presents instruments more lifelike, has bigger soundstage than Qutest, but less detail. But other reviewers say Qutest is the one that is more lifelike and that Qutest is much more detailed. Still others say Qutest sounds more obviously digital, while others say the reverse, that Qutest sounds LESS digital than Ares II. I have no chance of getting to audition both DACs in my home rig. Has anyone else actually managed to AvB the Ares II and Qutest ? Of course I have watched all the YT videos but as I said, some seem to say contradictory things so it becomes hard to know who to believe. Please don't suggest I compare Pontus II to Qutest as I can't stretch financially to a Pontus II.



I still have no idea when people compare device and start to wrote "this one sound more digital", like, what is the general consensus of "sound digital" itself? Why wouldn't they stick with bright/dark, warm/cold. thick/thin.

Anyway I believe chord qutest has more similar price to pontus II, not ares II.


----------



## Moonglum

Not in the UK when you include import duties - Pontus II is 100s more than Qutest


----------



## reggiegasket

this doesn't answer your question @Moonglum ...but if it helps, I also wrestled between the Ares and the Qutest decision. I plumped for the Chord in the end, as I felt it would better handle upgrades to elsewhere in the system i.e had more 'potential' but also because it was UK-made (which is biased I know). I've been very happy with the Qutest though. The sound, to me, in my system, with the music I listen to, is very impressive and extremely accurate/realistic with voices and imaging. The Ares may also be ace...


----------



## Drumonron

So for several years I've been happy with my Benchmark DAC2 HGC but I had an itch so I pulled the trigger the other day on the Chord Qutest.  Will I see an improvement?  Look forward to trying it to my HSA-1B and the SR1As.


----------



## Moonglum

Has anyone moved from a Mytek Brooklyn or Liberty to a Qutest? Or has both ? Was wondering how the sound signature compares? I’ve read conflicting reports- some say virtually indistinguishable while some (like Darko for example) claim the Qutest “has it all over the Brooklyn +” for sound quality.


----------



## antdroid

Hmmm... matching headphone amp?

https://www.heynowhifi.com.au/colle...ackages/products/chord-anni-desktop-amplifier


----------



## elira

Something to stack with the Qutest


antdroid said:


> Hmmm... matching headphone amp?
> 
> https://www.heynowhifi.com.au/colle...ackages/products/chord-anni-desktop-amplifier


 I’m not sure how they’re going to spin that one considering that Rob has mentioned before that Hugo 2 is better than qutest + amp.


----------



## Nostoi

antdroid said:


> Hmmm... matching headphone amp?
> 
> https://www.heynowhifi.com.au/colle...ackages/products/chord-anni-desktop-amplifier


This for real? Somehow looks fake.


----------



## antdroid

Nostoi said:


> This for real? Somehow looks fake.



It's a legit site as far as I know. Someone got trigger happy with the page release probably.


----------



## Nostoi

antdroid said:


> It's a legit site as far as I know. Someone got trigger happy with the page release probably.


Intrigued to know more. The design of it is quite appealing, I must say.


----------



## Christer

Drumonron said:


> So for several years I've been happy with my Benchmark DAC2 HGC but I had an itch so I pulled the trigger the other day on the Chord Qutest.  Will I see an improvement?  Look forward to trying it to my HSA-1B and the SR1As.


You won´t see an improvement, but if you also combine your Qutest with an Mscaler and play well recorded acoustic music, you will definitely HEAR an improvement.
I am still keeping my HGC2 as a VERY  good headphone amp with my Qutest/Mscaler combo though.
Clearly better combo than Hugo 2 with demanding headphones and non comressed dynamics, large scale symphonic recordings. And frankly  not THAT far behind a DAVE /Mscaler imho.
A 10 % improvement  or so , in SQ not really worth the extra 10 K one needs to pay over Q/HMS/HGC2.
Cheers CC


----------



## Moonglum

Moonglum said:


> Has anyone moved from a Mytek Brooklyn or Liberty to a Qutest? Or has both ? Was wondering how the sound signature compares? I’ve read conflicting reports- some say virtually indistinguishable while some (like Darko for example) claim the Qutest “has it all over the Brooklyn +” for sound quality.


anyone at all?


----------



## Nostoi

antdroid said:


> Hmmm... matching headphone amp?
> 
> https://www.heynowhifi.com.au/colle...ackages/products/chord-anni-desktop-amplifier


Page now removed. The plot thickens.


----------



## Nostoi

Moonglum said:


> anyone at all?


Best way is to demo both (or buy both and return one)


----------



## musicasmedicine

Hey guys,
Just ordered a Qutest and it’s coming this week!

I forgot to check on any rumours surrounding a new one being released soon. As this is a significant purchase for me, I would want this to be a current model for at least a couple more years. Any news surrounding this?

it seems like the Anni amplifier is on its way soon but haven’t seen anything about a new dac.


----------



## The Jester (Aug 22, 2021)

musicasmedicine said:


> Hey guys,
> Just ordered a Qutest and it’s coming this week!
> 
> I forgot to check on any rumours surrounding a new one being released soon. As this is a significant purchase for me, I would want this to be a current model for at least a couple more years. Any news surrounding this?
> ...


Haven’t heard anything, and from Rob’s comments on the forums his current project is the Davina ADC …
PS. Where in Aus are you ?


----------



## alekc

Moonglum said:


> Has anyone moved from a Mytek Brooklyn or Liberty to a Qutest? Or has both ? Was wondering how the sound signature compares? I’ve read conflicting reports- some say virtually indistinguishable while some (like Darko for example) claim the Qutest “has it all over the Brooklyn +” for sound quality.


A year ago I have been comparing Qutest with HTT2 and Mytek Brooklyn Bridge. I did it as Chord Mojo fan. HTT2 was most musical but less than MHA150 which os based on stock ess chip (like Mytek). I have tested Qutest with few amp including ones priced at double or triple the Qutest level and I haven't heard anything that moved my heart. I went with Mytek since it won over functionality and price performance against HTT2. 

The main problem with Qutest it has a different sound signature than Mojo and you never know it for sure since it is so dependant on amp synergy. 

If you really want a Chord dac go with Hugo TT or TT2 instead of Qutest IMHO.


----------



## Hooster

Nostoi said:


> Intrigued to know more. The design of it is quite appealing, I must say.



Oh no, they still have the ball fetish. No thanks.


----------



## Nostoi

Hooster said:


> Oh no, they still have the ball fetish. No thanks.


No balls, no Chord.


----------



## uzi2

Hooster said:


> Oh no, they still have the ball fetish. No thanks.


These are just clearly labelled switches - get over your ball fetish...


----------



## Cekootje

At least its got an on and off switch!


----------



## musicasmedicine

Do you guys just turn the surge protector off after using the Qutest? Worried about leaving it on all the time.

also, I’m in Sydney! 


The Jester said:


> Haven’t heard anything, and from Rob’s comments on the forums his current project is the Davina ADC …
> PS. Where in Aus are you ?


----------



## Hooster

Nostoi said:


> No balls, no Chord.



In that case, why use a rotating knob for the volume control and not a ball? Seems like they are confused.


----------



## The Jester

musicasmedicine said:


> Do you guys just turn the surge protector off after using the Qutest? Worried about leaving it on all the time.
> 
> also, I’m in Sydney!


I leave the Qutest and MScaler on all the time unless I’m out for a day or more then I switch off the power conditioner,
I’m in Brisbane,
thought on the off chance you were too you might want to listen to an MScaler with the Qutest …if the price seems a bit much though do yourself a favour and don’t listen to one … 🙄


----------



## Nostoi

Hooster said:


> In that case, why use a rotating knob for the volume control and not a ball? Seems like they are confused.


Balls and knobs generally go well together.


----------



## Hooster

Nostoi said:


> Balls and knobs generally go well together.



Thanks for solving that riddle. It makes perfect sense now.


----------



## Nostoi

Hooster said:


> Thanks for solving that riddle. It makes perfect sense now.


My comment will likely only make sense in a British context.


----------



## Malevolent (Aug 23, 2021)

musicasmedicine said:


> Hey guys,
> Just ordered a Qutest and it’s coming this week!
> 
> I forgot to check on any rumours surrounding a new one being released soon. As this is a significant purchase for me, I would want this to be a current model for at least a couple more years. Any news surrounding this?
> ...


In terms of age, the following Chord products (on the Head-Fi side of things) are listed in chronological order -

Dave
Mojo
Hugo 2
Qutest
Hugo TT 2
Thus, if a revision is incoming, they'll probably target the Mojo first, arguably their most popular product. It's basically an excellent condensation of the general Chord sound in a smaller, portable body; and pertinently so, a lot cheaper, too. In fact, a Mojo 2 has been rumored for quite some time now.

The Qutest is one of the brand's newer products, so I doubt that it'll be supplanted anytime soon; at least not within the next 2 years. Besides, the Anni looks like a perfect fit for the Qutest, so I'm quietly confident that the latter will not be replaced (yet).

For the higher-end tiers, I suspect that we'll get a Hugo 3 first, before a Qutest 2 is launched.


----------



## musicasmedicine

Malevolent said:


> In terms of age, the following Chord products (on the Head-Fi side of things) are listed in chronological order -
> 
> Mojo
> Dave
> ...


Thanks! That’s good to hear. I did call my hi-if shop again to ask about it. He echoed the same basically and stressed that the chip shortage globally means that even the Mojo may not get its successor until 2022.


----------



## musicasmedicine

Wow just got the Qutest today. It is exceptionally built. Loved the unboxing as well.
This genuinely feels like an apple of audio type of product.
Sound impressions to come in the next few days


----------



## The Jester

What’s the rest of your system it’ll be used in ?


----------



## musicasmedicine

The Jester said:


> What’s the rest of your system it’ll be used in


MacBook Pro (Apple lossless) --> Chord Qutest --> JDS Atom Amp+ (great little thing and more than enough for my HPs rn) --> Denon AH-D9200.

Next thing to upgrade will be the amp but I want to wait until I decide on my open back TOTL in a couple of years.


----------



## musicasmedicine

Set it all up today! Sounds great but I have a question. Is everyone's USB-B IN a bit loose? It doesn't lock into place when I connect the cable.


----------



## musicasmedicine (Aug 25, 2021)

Also, I'm playing 24/192 albums on apple music but the LED is still red on the Qutest. What am I doing wrong? Apple Music settings are set to maximum (24/192)

EDIT: figured this out. AppleMusic and macOS are to blame - it's not bit perfect and there is no exclusive mode. Sigh.


----------



## The Jester

Didn’t notice an issue with mine although I’m not using the stock cable …


----------



## musicasmedicine

Yeah Im using the stock cable. I'm assuming this is normal.


----------



## The Jester

Checkout bit perfect app to set output mode …


----------



## musicasmedicine

Looks like they haven't updated in a while? No support for Big Sur?


----------



## The Jester

Don’t use it myself, I use a Windows based player, just seen others recommending it ?


----------



## Nostoi

What's the best way to connect the BNC inputs to a set of RCA plugs on an amp, if I wanted to run two amps concurrently from the Qutest? Anyone got cable/adaptor recommendations?


----------



## Christer

musicasmedicine said:


> Set it all up today! Sounds great but I have a question. Is everyone's USB-B IN a bit loose? It doesn't lock into place when I connect the cable.


As I see it both  the supplied power unit and the  very annoying USB connection it has, are the TWO  Achilles heels of Qutest.
Cheap choices imho.
But fed well recorded music  with a better supply and via Mscaler or PGGB ,it can deliver  VERY good SQ. 
Cheers CC


----------



## musicasmedicine

Yeah, thanks. Glad to know it’s not just me!  
I’m loving it so far. Increased depth is the main thing I’ve noticed. Whether it’s placebo or not, frankly I don’t care haha. It’s a well built product for the most part, made in the UK, and has a very unique design + measures extremely well. I’m very happy with it.

I’m using it with a JDS atom amp+ as I wanted a super clean, powerful amp that didn’t change the sound of the Qutest much. Will look into an Anni or something in a couple of years 

Next purchase will likely be a Verite Open down the road  


Christer said:


> As I see it both  the supplied power unit and the  very annoying USB connection it has, are the TWO  Achilles heels of Qutest.
> Cheap choices imho.
> But fed well recorded music  with a better supply and via Mscaler or PGGB ,it can deliver  VERY good SQ.
> Cheers CC


----------



## Cekootje

I’ve been playing around with different power supplies. I don’t really notice any difference. Sooooo is my system not resolving enough? Are my ears broken? What is it?


----------



## Nostoi

Cekootje said:


> I’ve been playing around with different power supplies. I don’t really notice any difference. Sooooo is my system not resolving enough? Are my ears broken? What is it?


Which ones, if I may ask?


----------



## Cekootje

Nostoi said:


> Which ones, if I may ask?


Battery power vs the regular psu. I wanted the battery to sound better so at first I thought it did. But then I did some blind tests and guess what? No difference at all.


----------



## Nostoi

Cekootje said:


> Battery power vs the regular psu. I wanted the battery to sound better so at first I thought it did. But then I did some blind tests and guess what? No difference at all.


Blind test is the only way. I have the Farad Super3 incoming next week, which I'll test in the same way. 

TBH: I was driving the Qutest directly from an external Thinkpad USB-C dock, which outputs 5v through an always-on USB port and couldn't hear the difference when powering from the regular PSU. The  Thinkpad USB-C dock set-up is likely considered the most non-audiophile route possible, but sounded perfectly good to me.


----------



## Triode User

Cekootje said:


> Battery power vs the regular psu. I wanted the battery to sound better so at first I thought it did. But then I did some blind tests and guess what? No difference at all.


I found battery came out relatively poorly powering the Qutest compared to some other power supplies. To my ears the Qutest really does benefit from good power from the sublime (Sean Jacobs DC4) to the Farad Super3 which I thought a good balance of cost vs sound quality (and which was much better than battery to my ears). Of course all batteries are not equal and also it is worth mentioning that some people have good success with huge battery low impedance banks going into a regulator stage to power the Qutest (and indeed the Dave).


----------



## Cekootje

Triode User said:


> I found battery came out relatively poorly powering the Qutest compared to some other power supplies. To my ears the Qutest really does benefit from good power from the sublime (Sean Jacobs DC4) to the Farad Super3 which I thought a good balance of cost vs sound quality (and which was much better than battery to my ears). Of course all batteries are not equal and also it is worth mentioning that some people have good success with huge battery low impedance banks going into a regulator stage to power the Qutest (and indeed the Dave).


I’m not that technical, can you explain what different properties batteries can have? I was thinking 5V is 5V but apparently not?


----------



## Steve Wilcox

musicasmedicine said:


> Yeah, thanks. Glad to know it’s not just me!
> I’m loving it so far. Increased depth is the main thing I’ve noticed. Whether it’s placebo or not, frankly I don’t care haha. It’s a well built product for the most part, made in the UK, and has a very unique design + measures extremely well. I’m very happy with it.
> 
> I’m using it with a JDS atom amp+ as I wanted a super clean, powerful amp that didn’t change the sound of the Qutest much. Will look into an Anni or something in a couple of years
> ...


I'm sure you won't be disappointed with the ZMF Verites. I have the closed version, via Qutest and Pathos Aurium tube hybrid amp and I couldn't be happier. If you haven't considered the closed version, you might want to do so. Forget everything you'd expect from a closed back can. You're really giving up nothing against open backs and have the bonus of better isolation.  There are, I understand, differences in the sound signature but these seem to be a matter of preference rather than one being better than the other.


----------



## musicasmedicine

Hi guys,

is it safe to turn off the Qutest through the surge protector switch every night?

thanks!


----------



## GreenBow (Aug 30, 2021)

LCMusicLover said:


> OK, one more time:
> 
> How does the sound of the Qutest compare to the sound of Hugo 2 when BOTH are NOT driven by USB?
> 
> Meaning I don't care about performance when playing from USB inputs, nor about how much sound quality improves when switching from USB input to Optical or Coax.



Probaly already sorted, but I have not checked in on the Qutest thread for two months-ish.

The Hugo 2 and Qutest sound identical in timbre and tonality. There is one slight difference between the DACs, in that the Hugo 2 has a better output stage. The Qutest has the Mojo output stage. The Hugo 2 has a more refined output stage because it drives headphones directly. It needs to be clearer at lower output voltage, for headphone listening. Typically headphone voltage is less that 2v, and less than 1v.

Whereas Qutest output voltage is set to 2v usually.

(I heard this info from Rob Watts.)

This is my opinion. Please do not think there is a vast difference between Hugo 2 and Qutest, when used with a speaker amplifier that is. On a quick A-B, I could not hear any difference.


----------



## Cekootje

Triode User said:


> I found battery came out relatively poorly powering the Qutest compared to some other power supplies. To my ears the Qutest really does benefit from good power from the sublime (Sean Jacobs DC4) to the Farad Super3 which I thought a good balance of cost vs sound quality (and which was much better than battery to my ears). Of course all batteries are not equal and also it is worth mentioning that some people have good success with huge battery low impedance banks going into a regulator stage to power the Qutest (and indeed the Dave).


I’ll ask again before my question gets stranded 
You say “all batteries are not equal”, so what difference can batteries make then?


----------



## ToxicRisk

Hi, 
I'm looking for a new DAC for my headphones desktop setup.

I still hesitate to going full balanced or stay unbalanced. 
Because I'm very interested into the Qutest or the Bifrost 2.
One is xlr the other is RCA. 

The amp will be for xlr the Little Dot Mk3 SE. 
And I've no idea for the rca setup, I want tube amp for my setup. 

Any advise?


----------



## The Jester

Cekootje said:


> I’ll ask again before my question gets stranded
> You say “all batteries are not equal”, so what difference can batteries make then?


The only “native” 5v batteries are the 1.25v rechargeable ones in series to add up to 5v, depends what’s inside the various powerbanks and they usually have fairly cheap regulated 5v output from a 6 or7.2v internal battery, as they are mainly designed as a “recharger” rather than powering equipment, so the regulation circuit could be quieter or just as noisy as the standard power adapter, even with a 12v battery driving 12v equipment the output impedance of the battery may not allow “instant” increases in current that digital circuits demand, even so we’re talking subtle differences rather than night and day ….


----------



## theaudiologist1

qutest or hugo?


----------



## Nostoi

theaudiologist1 said:


> qutest or hugo?


Linguine or ravioli, depends on the broader ingredients and what you're going to serve with it.


----------



## theaudiologist1

Nostoi said:


> Linguine or ravioli, depends on the broader ingredients and what you're going to serve with it.


which one has the more neutral and realistic sound?


----------



## Nostoi

theaudiologist1 said:


> which one has the more neutral and realistic sound?


Depends on the amp. The Qutest is just a DAC, so any discussion of its tonality has to be framed in context of amp. What's your amp?


----------



## theaudiologist1

Nostoi said:


> Depends on the amp. The Qutest is just a DAC, so any discussion of its tonality has to be framed in context of amp. What's your amp?


Oh right. I think spending $1500 on just the DAC is dumb. The AMP does way more for the sound. I have a DAC/AMP not an AMP.


----------



## Nostoi

theaudiologist1 said:


> Oh right. I think spending $1500 on just the DAC is dumb. The AMP does way more for the sound.


Not really that much within the scheme of DACs but it sounds as though an all in one would suit you best, so go Hugo2.


----------



## Jon L

The Jester said:


> The only “native” 5v batteries are the 1.25v rechargeable ones in series to add up to 5v



Yup.  With the Qutest, however, I prefer the SQ of decent LPS (e.g. Shanti) over even "native" battery pack.  Of course, there are people who will prefer that buttery liquid battery sound, too...


0910200831 by drjlo2, on Flickr


----------



## LCMusicLover

GreenBow said:


> Probaly already sorted, but I have not checked in on the Qutest thread for two months-ish.
> 
> The Hugo 2 and Qutest sound identical in timbre and tonality. There is one slight difference between the DACs, in that the Hugo 2 has a better output stage. The Qutest has the Mojo output stage. The Hugo 2 has a more refined output stage because it drives headphones directly. It needs to be clearer at lower output voltage, for headphone listening. Typically headphone voltage is less that 2v, and less than 1v.
> 
> ...


Thank you very much -- yours was the first _useful_ reply (on either thread).


----------



## GreenBow (Aug 30, 2021)

LCMusicLover said:


> Thank you very much -- yours was the first _useful_ reply (on either thread).


I found some of Rob's posts about the Qutest and Hugo 2 output stages.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-hugo-2-the-official-thread.831345/post-14593021

Post #14,801 of 20,289


----------



## Kelseyh123

just wondering if the low volume noise issue has been solved on newer units?


----------



## technobear

Kelseyh123 said:


> just wondering if the low volume noise issue has been solved on newer units?


Qutest is a DAC. It doesn't have a volume control.


----------



## Kelseyh123

technobear said:


> Qutest is a DAC. It doesn't have a volume control.


maybe I miss understood, I thought I read somewhere distortion coming off the dac when playing external devices at low volume.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

Kelseyh123 said:


> maybe I miss understood, I thought I read somewhere distortion coming off the dac when playing external devices at low volume.



no distortion on my unit when tested with singxer amp at 55dB (my usual morning volume)


----------



## Alfred Oz (Sep 4, 2021)

Hi, hoping someone can help me.

I'm using Qobuz, asio 1.05 drivers with my Qutest on windows 10. Certain tracks start playing really slowly. I have no idea what's causing it. Anyone experience this before?


----------



## Nostoi

Got a Farad Super 3 on loan here. Compared to stock PSU, it seems to be subtly less forward, slightly smoother. I understand it requires some burn in. Any difference is certainly subtle, and at this point, I lean more toward stock PSU. I will say, build on Farad is really nice. Very solid with an appealing design.


----------



## Jon L

Nostoi said:


> Got a Farad Super 3 on loan here. Compared to stock PSU, it seems to be subtly less forward, slightly smoother. I understand it requires some burn in. Any difference is certainly subtle, and at this point, I lean more toward stock PSU. I will say, build on Farad is really nice. Very solid with an appealing design.


Do let the PSU burn in more and report back.  Instead of keeping it on all the time, turning it on and off after listening will burn in caps faster.
Having said that, IME user reports and Reviews of power supplies out there do tend to over-emphasize the degree of differences, say compared to degree of difference among different speakers/rooms...


----------



## Nostoi

Jon L said:


> Do let the PSU burn in more and report back.  Instead of keeping it on all the time, turning it on and off after listening will burn in caps faster.
> Having said that, IME user reports and Reviews of power supplies out there do tend to over-emphasize the degree of differences, say compared to degree of difference among different speakers/rooms...


That's interesting about the tuning it on and off aspect during burn in. I will continue to test and report back. Farad recommend 500 hours of break in. I'm not sure if I have that long given it's on loan, but we'll see.


----------



## Triode User

Jon L said:


> Do let the PSU burn in more and report back.  Instead of keeping it on all the time, turning it on and off after listening will burn in caps faster.
> Having said that, IME user reports and Reviews of power supplies out there do tend to over-emphasize the degree of differences, say compared to degree of difference among different speakers/rooms...



There are probably different thoughts on power supply burn in. Sean Jacobs says the large Mundorf caps in his power supplies need time to settle and that any power off/on with subsequent current inrush will disrupt that and then require a further period of settling. I tend to follow that advice with new power supplies including my Farad Super3 when I bought it.


----------



## Nostoi

Triode User said:


> There are probably different thoughts on power supply burn in. Sean Jacobs says the large Mundorf caps in his power supplies need time to settle and that any power off/on with subsequent current inrush will disrupt that and then require a further period of settling. I tend to follow that advice with new power supplies including my Farad Super3 when I bought it.


From experience, did you find your Farad reached an optimal state after burn in (though presumably any change is subtle)?


----------



## Aurora0001

Had the opportunity to try Qutest recently, I think it’s a nice, natural sounding (somewhat revealing) DAC. Personally prefer Hugo 2 somehow. 😬


----------



## Fugue

My Qutest arrived today. I haven't had a lot of time to listen to it, but so far I love it! Richer, more detailed, and far more natural sounding than either the DAC in my amp or my Oppo 205.


----------



## Nostoi

Nostoi said:


> Got a Farad Super 3 on loan here. Compared to stock PSU, it seems to be subtly less forward, slightly smoother. I understand it requires some burn in. Any difference is certainly subtle, and at this point, I lean more toward stock PSU. I will say, build on Farad is really nice. Very solid with an appealing design.


I've had the Farad Super 3 here for a few days. I can discern some subtle changes in the presentation, but alas these changes are not my cup of tea. I find the Farad tends to smoothen things a little too much for me. I also have the iFi iPower (2nd version) and iPower X (hardly any difference between them), which seems to retain the more forward presentation of the stock PSU with a blacker background, so is probably the best for my purposes at least in terms of physical build (though not really a fan of iFi and their goofy marketing style)

All in all, I guess I'm not totally sure of what my expectations of adding a LPU to the Qutest are/were. Ideally - and this may be misguided - I would have hoped for something to contribute to a greater level of resolution. The Farad Super 3 didn't seem to do that, but did render the presentation less fatiguing, which may be appealing to some listeners.


----------



## briantrinh86

hi folks. my amp xiaudio broadway has xlr output only. can i use the xlr to rca adapter to connect chord qutest to my balance amp. is that any harm to the qutest?


----------



## JelStIy

I just acquired the Qutest and am having some issues. When I first plugged it in and connected it to the amp, everything functioned as it should. Then I decided to change the output voltage (it took me a few tries as I didn't understand the color scheme). Then I connected it back to the amp, listened some, only for the music to stop abruptly. I disconnected it and plugged in again; the lights started flashing. After another dis/reconnect, now music plays, but I can't change the filter or the input (when I press the filter blob, the blobs just dim). The blobs (usually) do react during start up. I tried a cell phone charger and a battery just to see that that it isn't the power supply -- same thing. 

 Help -- is there a way to reset this thing completely? Surely there must be a magic blob press combination that does that. I really don't want to have to return it.


----------



## u2u2 (Sep 9, 2021)

JelStIy said:


> I just acquired the Qutest and am having some issues. When I first plugged it in and connected it to the amp, everything functioned as it should. Then I decided to change the output voltage (it took me a few tries as I didn't understand the color scheme). Then I connected it back to the amp, listened some, only for the music to stop abruptly. I disconnected it and plugged in again; the lights started flashing. After another dis/reconnect, now music plays, but I can't change the filter or the input (when I press the filter blob, the blobs just dim). The blobs (usually) do react during start up. I tried a cell phone charger and a battery just to see that that it isn't the power supply -- same thing.
> 
> Help -- is there a way to reset this thing completely? Surely there must be a magic blob press combination that does that. I really don't want to have to return it.


It resets every time you apply power to it but it remembers the last voltage output selection.

Long shot, but if you bought it used it might have sticky balls. You should feel a slight movement and hear a click when you press them if they are clean. There is a video on line about a gent who had sticky balls and the unit could not be serviced due to the pandemic so Chord let the guy pull the cover, clean his balls, and reassemble. Pretty easy looking job and it worked to his satisfaction… If it is used and out of warranty a low risk move.

If you bought it new your dealer ought to step up and lend a hand.

(Search for Chord Qutest Button Fix On You Tube)


----------



## JelStIy (Sep 9, 2021)

u2u2 said:


> It resets every time you apply power to it but it remembers the last voltage output selection.
> 
> Long shot, but if you bought it used it might have sticky balls. You should feel a slight movement and hear a click when you press them if they are clean. There is a video on line about a gent who had sticky balls and the unit could not be serviced due to the pandemic so Chord let the guy pull the cover, clean his balls, and reassemble. Pretty easy looking job and it worked to his satisfaction… If it is used and out of warranty a low risk move.
> 
> ...


Thanks -- was hoping for a full factory reset trick but since the balls are the only way to communicate with this device it wouldn't have helped much. The video was useful -- thanks -- although I think this must be more than a mechanical problem.

The device was bought new and indeed looks brand new. The balls do appear completely stuck -- no movement, no clicking. The flashing lights have now come back too. Oddly enough it none of this interferes with actual music playing and the bitrate color indicator is correct.

I'll reach out to Chord support and the dealer to see if there is a way to fix this.

EDIT: I flipped the device over to locate the serial number and that seems to have loosened the balls enough to be functional again. And then they got stuck again, and unstuck by flipping the thing over again. This is just bizarre.


----------



## Hooster

Ah, the joys of the colored balls ^^^


----------



## The Jester (Sep 10, 2021)

JelStIy said:


> Thanks -- was hoping for a full factory reset trick but since the balls are the only way to communicate with this device it wouldn't have helped much. The video was useful -- thanks -- although I think this must be more than a mechanical problem.
> 
> The device was bought new and indeed looks brand new. The balls do appear completely stuck -- no movement, no clicking. The flashing lights have now come back too. Oddly enough it none of this interferes with actual music playing and the bitrate color indicator is correct.
> 
> ...


Maybe try lightly vacuuming when it’s upside down in case there’s any “rubbish” got in around the buttons ?
if the buttons may not have been pressed for some time and you’re switching voltages have exposed them being “sticky” ..


----------



## axsnyder

Speaking of balls...

My brand new Qutest is in for RMA right now due to "flashy" balls.  And "non-responsive" balls - you try playing with them and nothing happens.  

They called yesterday to say the board slightly shifted (probably in shipping), making it so the balls wouldn't move.  The Qutest knew something was wrong, so it would flash all the lights - not just the balls.

The Chord supplier in the US and Chord in Britain were great to work with!  Super responsive.  Sounds like my Qutest is on the way back.


----------



## JelStIy

axsnyder said:


> Speaking of balls...
> 
> My brand new Qutest is in for RMA right now due to "flashy" balls.  And "non-responsive" balls - you try playing with them and nothing happens.
> 
> ...


That sounds like what happened to mine, also brand new as noted above. By the way, mine seems to have fixed itself -- no more flashing lights and the balls are now moving. Something must have reseated itself when I flipped it over (gently). Still, unsettling that such slight movement can affect function.


----------



## briantrinh86

is it safe to use xlr to rca adapter to connect to chord qutest?


----------



## TheMiddleSky

briantrinh86 said:


> is it safe to use xlr to rca adapter to connect to chord qutest?


Qutest only accept digital. Not possible with analog input.


----------



## dac64

briantrinh86 said:


> is it safe to use xlr to rca adapter to connect to chord qutest?



Sure! It's safe to use the adapter but SQ will compromise.


----------



## Fugue

My Qutest DAC sounds great with my MacBook Pro, but when I use my HP Omen laptop (Windows based), DSD files are terribly distorted. (Yes, I installed the ASIO driver!) I ended up returning it, thinking it was defective. I just bought another one--same issue. I use both JRiver and Audirvana to play files, and I get the same results. I contacted Chord's tech department a few months ago, but they were at a loss! The tech sent me a different driver to try, but it didn't help. Has anyone else had this problem and did you resolve it? If so, please share!


----------



## Alfred Oz

Fugue said:


> My Qutest DAC sounds great with my MacBook Pro, but when I use my HP Omen laptop (Windows based), DSD files are terribly distorted. (Yes, I installed the ASIO driver!) I ended up returning it, thinking it was defective. I just bought another one--same issue. I use both JRiver and Audirvana to play files, and I get the same results. I contacted Chord's tech department a few months ago, but they were at a loss! The tech sent me a different driver to try, but it didn't help. Has anyone else had this problem and did you resolve it? If so, please share!


I was able to use audirvana to test out some DSD files with my Qutest recently and there was no distortion. I was testing with both wasapi and asio because I was testing my qutest relating to another issue. Using roon if I upsample in DSD there's no distortion and the Qutest lights up white as expected. 

Background.I know this because I recently chased my tail trying to get Qutest asio drivers to work with qobuz which I never succeeded in. No issues via roon though. 

Side note, I did email chord about asio drivers and qobuz and they recommended I use wasapi.


----------



## Fugue

Alfred Oz said:


> I was able to use audirvana to test out some DSD files with my Qutest recently and there was no distortion. I was testing with both wasapi and asio because I was testing my qutest relating to another issue. Using roon if I upsample in DSD there's no distortion and the Qutest lights up white as expected.
> 
> Background.I know this because I recently chased my tail trying to get Qutest asio drivers to work with qobuz which I never succeeded in. No issues via roon though.
> 
> Side note, I did email chord about asio drivers and qobuz and they recommended I use wasapi.


I tried the WASAPI with JRiver (It isn't an option with Audirvana), but it didn't work either.


----------



## Nostoi

Fugue said:


> My Qutest DAC sounds great with my MacBook Pro, but when I use my HP Omen laptop (Windows based), DSD files are terribly distorted. (Yes, I installed the ASIO driver!) I ended up returning it, thinking it was defective. I just bought another one--same issue. I use both JRiver and Audirvana to play files, and I get the same results. I contacted Chord's tech department a few months ago, but they were at a loss! The tech sent me a different driver to try, but it didn't help. Has anyone else had this problem and did you resolve it? If so, please share!


No issues with Roon on either ASIO (native) or WASAPI (DoP). WASAPI seems a little preferable to me. Almost certainly an issue with your software. If you're not prepared to fork out for Roon, you can set-up decent system with Foobar, but requires patience and research.


----------



## Fugue

Nostoi said:


> No issues with Roon on either ASIO (native) or WASAPI (DoP). WASAPI seems a little preferable to me. Almost certainly an issue with your software. If you're not prepared to fork out for Roon, you can set-up decent system with Foobar, but requires patience and research.


Both software programs work perfectly with the DAC in my Oppo 205 and McIntosh MA9000 amp, so that isn't the issue.


----------



## GreenBow

JelStIy said:


> I just acquired the Qutest and am having some issues. When I first plugged it in and connected it to the amp, everything functioned as it should. Then I decided to change the output voltage (it took me a few tries as I didn't understand the color scheme). Then I connected it back to the amp, listened some, only for the music to stop abruptly. I disconnected it and plugged in again; the lights started flashing. After another dis/reconnect, now music plays, but I can't change the filter or the input (when I press the filter blob, the blobs just dim). The blobs (usually) do react during start up. I tried a cell phone charger and a battery just to see that that it isn't the power supply -- same thing.
> 
> Help -- is there a way to reset this thing completely? Surely there must be a magic blob press combination that does that. I really don't want to have to return it.



It does sound like a job for your retailer to look at.

I presume you read the manual.

When you said you played music and it just stopped, is it possible you had it in 3v mode. Am wondering if you sent too much voltage to your map and your amp clipped out somehow. ... Anyway as you got it runing again, no harm done.


----------



## TheMiddleSky (Sep 16, 2021)

Fugue said:


> My Qutest DAC sounds great with my MacBook Pro, but when I use my HP Omen laptop (Windows based), DSD files are terribly distorted. (Yes, I installed the ASIO driver!) I ended up returning it, thinking it was defective. I just bought another one--same issue. I use both JRiver and Audirvana to play files, and I get the same results. I contacted Chord's tech department a few months ago, but they were at a loss! The tech sent me a different driver to try, but it didn't help. Has anyone else had this problem and did you resolve it? If so, please share!


My friend actually have same problem as you. Happen to all 3 latest chord dac: Qutest, Hugo 2, TT2. His windows laptop (asio and wasapi inside) perfectly fine with denafrip pontus, various questyle dac, various topping dac.

I tried to take a look, experiment with all settings I could find, and zero result. All of three chord dac above perfectly fine to my macbook, windows laptop (there are 2 of them), my friend's ipad, AK380 copper, and any other digital device we could find here.

Confusing to the max, I know.


----------



## Fugue

TheMiddleSky said:


> My friend actually have same problem as you. Happen to all 3 latest chord dac: Qutest, Hugo 2, TT2. His windows laptop (asio and wasapi inside) perfectly fine with denafrip pontus, various questyle dac, various topping dac.
> 
> I tried to take a look, experiment with all settings I could find, and zero result. All of three chord dac above perfectly fine to my macbook, windows laptop (there are 2 of them), my friend's ipad, AK380 copper, and any other digital device we could find here.
> 
> Confusing to the max, I know.


It must be something in the respective laptop's audio structure since it works with your Windows laptop. Until I run out of storage space, I'm OK with my Macbook Pro. At that point, I'll probably look into a dedicated music server such as Aurender, AuraliC, etc.


----------



## Chop-Top

beemarman said:


> I would say darker compared to the original PS. Improved detail, more spacious and less fatigue as well. In fact, I sold my TT2 because I really couldn't tell the difference between using the Qutest with the Sbooster PS and the TT2. I'm going to use the money saved for other things.


Totally agree!  SBooster took my Qutest to another level.


----------



## briantrinh86

Chop-Top said:


> Totally agree!  SBooster took my Qutest to another level.


hi, can i have a link or product image. thank you very much


----------



## Chop-Top

briantrinh86 said:


> hi, can i have a link or product image. thank you very much


https://upscaleaudio.com/products/sbooster-botw-p-p-mkii-power-supply


----------



## briantrinh86

Chop-Top said:


> https://upscaleaudio.com/products/sbooster-botw-p-p-mkii-power-supply


thank you bro


----------



## briantrinh86 (Sep 16, 2021)

Chop-Top said:


> https://upscaleaudio.com/products/sbooster-botw-p-p-mkii-power-supply


did u hear a huge difference bro? compare without the ps


----------



## Chop-Top

briantrinh86 said:


> did u hear a huge difference bro? compare without the ps


Not huge for headphone listening, but a much greater improvement with home audio system.  Well worth the cost IMO.


----------



## briantrinh86

Chop-Top said:


> Not huge for headphone listening, but a much greater improvement with home audio system.  Well worth the cost IMO.


thanks for answering my question, i appriciate that


----------



## JazzAudioDog

Chop-Top said:


> Totally agree!  SBooster took my Qutest to another level.


I had the same result. Major positive improvement!  Ensure your Qutest is fully broken-in prior to trying the SBooster. And the SBooster itself has a long break-in requirement. The first 25 to 50 hours I thought “what have I done?”. Then it started to improve. Leave it fully powered-up at all times. Same for the Qutest. Always powered up. Neither uses much electricity.  That was one of my criteria for selecting these components.


----------



## GreenBow (Sep 17, 2021)

Have folks in the Qutest thread come across a new Chord product? It's related to the Qutest. A desktop amplifier in the same shape as the Qutest.

Chord Anni ... https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-anni.959277/

There's also a frame to stack Anii and Qutest.

For sale at Nintronics.
https://nintronics.co.uk/chord-electronics-anni-desktop-amplifier.html


----------



## TheMiddleSky

TheMiddleSky said:


> My friend actually have same problem as you. Happen to all 3 latest chord dac: Qutest, Hugo 2, TT2. His windows laptop (asio and wasapi inside) perfectly fine with denafrip pontus, various questyle dac, various topping dac.
> 
> I tried to take a look, experiment with all settings I could find, and zero result. All of three chord dac above perfectly fine to my macbook, windows laptop (there are 2 of them), my friend's ipad, AK380 copper, and any other digital device we could find here.
> 
> Confusing to the max, I know.



We solved the problem!

Believe it or not the problem is because the laptop is not charging while use these Chord products. Simply because the laptop Asus Ultrabook with ultra low consumption energy (so have long lasting battery without charge). I think the OS affect the USB out in a way (to save energy) that not able to play DSD file with Qutest/Hugo2/TT2. However, when we charging the laptop, suddenly everything working well.


----------



## The Jester

TheMiddleSky said:


> We solved the problem!
> 
> Believe it or not the problem is because the laptop is not charging while use these Chord products. Simply because the laptop Asus Ultrabook with ultra low consumption energy (so have long lasting battery without charge). I think the OS affect the USB out in a way (to save energy) that not able to play DSD file with Qutest/Hugo2/TT2. However, when we charging the laptop, suddenly everything working well.


Windows device manager … find the USB port you’re using, select “properties” and you should find a box checked “ allow computer to turn off this device” … simply un check it …


----------



## MarkusBarkus

A new Qutest-related product...


----------



## Sense

Ok...I've finally pulled the trigger on a Qutest...a few questions:
1) How do I turn it off (I know some of you probably will say no need to, but I want to)
2) What voltage do you guys use it at? 1v/2v/3v?
3) What filter do you guys use?
4) What is the cheapest power supply that will improve the sound? (I don't want to spend $350 on a PS)
5) I hear you can use a battery...has anyone tried those batteries that are also wall warts? I think Anker makes them.


----------



## elira

Sense said:


> 1) How do I turn it off (I know some of you probably will say no need to, but I want to)


You'll have to disconnect it or buy one of those micro usb cables that have a switch.


Sense said:


> 2) What voltage do you guys use it at? 1v/2v/3v?


Depends on the amp, 3V if possible.


Sense said:


> 3) What filter do you guys use?


The white one.

And I just use the stock power supply.


----------



## Alfred Oz

To be honest I can't tell the difference between each filter. Is there any test tracks that really accentuate the differences?


----------



## Atriya

I'm having an issue with my brand new Qutest that I'm hoping someone can identify. Whenever I play a sample rate higher than 192Khz via USB (either by upscaling - I use Roon - or by playing DXD files), I get crackling and "warping"-sounding distortion. In fact at 384Khz I get the crackling and warping for a few seconds, and then a burst of "white noise". Anything lower than or at 192Khz plays fine. I'm using the official Chord drivers on Windows 10, and this happens when using both WASAPI and ASIO on Roon. My computer should be more than powerful enough (11th gen i7 processor), and in fact plays >192Khz files just fine through other DACs (e.g. Topping D90SE, which I tried for a while).


----------



## elira

Atriya said:


> I'm having an issue with my brand new Qutest that I'm hoping someone can identify. Whenever I play a sample rate higher than 192Khz via USB (either by upscaling - I use Roon - or by playing DXD files), I get crackling and "warping"-sounding distortion. In fact at 384Khz I get the crackling and warping for a few seconds, and then a burst of "white noise". Anything lower than or at 192Khz plays fine. I'm using the official Chord drivers on Windows 10, and this happens when using both WASAPI and ASIO on Roon. My computer should be more than powerful enough (11th gen i7 processor), and in fact plays >192Khz files just fine through other DACs (e.g. Topping D90SE, which I tried for a while).


Try a different USB cable.


----------



## Atriya

elira said:


> Try a different USB cable.


Thanks. I tried a different one, and had the same problem as with the cable that came with the Qutest.


----------



## elira

Atriya said:


> Thanks. I tried a different one, and had the same problem as with the cable that came with the Qutest.


Make sure you are going directly to the computer, no hubs, filtering or other stuff. Also try a different USB port, that might fix your issue. Other than that you can try re-installing the drivers or testing in a different computer.

If nothing works contact your dealer or Chord.


----------



## Atriya (Sep 25, 2021)

elira said:


> Make sure you are going directly to the computer, no hubs, filtering or other stuff. Also try a different USB port, that might fix your issue. Other than that you can try re-installing the drivers or testing in a different computer.
> 
> If nothing works contact your dealer or Chord.


Thanks! Yes, this is going directly into the computer. Different USB port didn't work.

I uninstalled the Chord drivers, and tried running with whatever Windows 10 has by default. The problem disappeared.

Something is wrong with the drivers Chord provides.


----------



## uzi2

Sense said:


> Ok...I've finally pulled the trigger on a Qutest...a few questions:
> 1) How do I turn it off (I know some of you probably will say no need to, but I want to)
> 2) What voltage do you guys use it at? 1v/2v/3v?
> 3) What filter do you guys use?
> ...


1>Get an inline switch - commonly available as a Raspberry Pi accessory
2> Use the highest that your amp will accept (usually 2 or 3)
3> The filters are designed for different inputs, but green or white suits my ears.
4> You will need to spend $350+ to improve the sound, so stick with the original.
5> The only battery that provides a native 5v is 4x NiMh. All others require potentially noisy switching circuits, thereby defeating the object, including those you describe.


----------



## Atriya (Sep 25, 2021)

A lot of the discussion around Chord products and their unique sound seems to be about their upsampling technology & WTA filter taps - 50k on the Qutest, 100k on the TT2, 1 million on the M Scaler.

Hypothetically, if one were take that advantage "away" from a Chord DAC by upsampling with HQPlayer and inputting a 768Khz signal, what advantages would the HQPlayer upsampling+Chord DAC provide over HQPlayer upsampling+modern delta-sigma DAC (say the Topping D90SE)? Or for that matter, how would the M Scaler+Chord DAC be different from the M Scaler+modern delta-sigma DAC?

I'm not interested in comparing HQPlayer upsampling vs M Scaler here (lot of posts on that), I'm interested in comparing a Chord DAC pre-provided with a 768Khz signal vs a delta-sigma DAC pre-provided with a 768Khz signal (assuming 786Khz is the max for both DACs, so neither upsamples anymore).


----------



## TheMiddleSky

Atriya said:


> I'm having an issue with my brand new Qutest that I'm hoping someone can identify. Whenever I play a sample rate higher than 192Khz via USB (either by upscaling - I use Roon - or by playing DXD files), I get crackling and "warping"-sounding distortion. In fact at 384Khz I get the crackling and warping for a few seconds, and then a burst of "white noise". Anything lower than or at 192Khz plays fine. I'm using the official Chord drivers on Windows 10, and this happens when using both WASAPI and ASIO on Roon. My computer should be more than powerful enough (11th gen i7 processor), and in fact plays >192Khz files just fine through other DACs (e.g. Topping D90SE, which I tried for a while).



Happened before with my friend's laptop. The solution is to charged the laptop while playing dsd file. Some "ultra saving energy" system may occur when we discharge the laptop. Of course different laptop may behave differently.


----------



## x RELIC x

Atriya said:


> A lot of the discussion around Chord products and their unique sound seems to be about their upsampling technology & WTA filter taps - 50k on the Qutest, 100k on the TT2, 1 million on the M Scaler.
> 
> Hypothetically, if one were take that advantage "away" from a Chord DAC by upsampling with HQPlayer and inputting a 768Khz signal, what advantages would the HQPlayer upsampling+Chord DAC provide over HQPlayer upsampling+modern delta-sigma DAC (say the Topping D90SE)? Or for that matter, how would the M Scaler+Chord DAC be different from the M Scaler+modern delta-sigma DAC?
> 
> I'm not interested in comparing HQPlayer upsampling vs M Scaler here (lot of posts on that), I'm interested in comparing a Chord DAC pre-provided with a 768Khz signal vs a delta-sigma DAC pre-provided with a 768Khz signal (assuming 786Khz is the max for both DACs, so neither upsamples anymore).


There is also the discrete Power Pulse Array DAC invented by Rob Watts, on top of the digital filters with the WTA algorithm.


----------



## Atriya

x RELIC x said:


> There is also the discrete Power Pulse Array DAC invented by Rob Watts, on top of the digital filters with the WTA algorithm.


Thanks! Looks like there's not much information on the web as to what this actually is, and how it differs from other DACs.


----------



## x RELIC x

Atriya said:


> Thanks! Looks like there's not much information on the web as to what this actually is, and how it differs from other DACs.


You can search Head-Fi for Pulse Array by member @Rob Watts 

Like these results:

https://www.head-fi.org/search/6561155/?q=Pulse+array&c[users]=Rob+Watts&o=relevance


----------



## The Jester

Try searching Rob Watts, or Chord DACs, even chord MScaler and you’ll find several in depth video releases that go into enough detail …


----------



## Sense

Has anyone tried the Topping P50 with the Qutest? Does the 5v/1A output work well?


----------



## Atriya

Sense said:


> Has anyone tried the Topping P50 with the Qutest? Does the 5v/1A output work well?


1A is minimum according to the manual, so it should work. Haven't tried it though.


----------



## Sense

Atriya said:


> 1A is minimum according to the manual, so it should work. Haven't tried it though.


Is there any reason why 1A would do anything to the sound quality?


----------



## Atriya (Sep 27, 2021)

Has anyone had any issues with the Chord drivers for the Qutest, on Windows 10? Using these drivers, I have various problems when playing music upsampled beyond 192Khz: clicks, pops, electronic blips, sometimes even white noise on one or both channels, when using either HQPlayer or Roon to upsample. Strangely (to me), none of these problems arise if I simply uninstall the Chord drivers i.e. even though the device manager calls the Qutest an "unidentified device" with no drivers at all, it inexplicably plays (via both HQPlayer and Roon) a 768Khz/32-bit stream perfectly via USB, with no glitches whatsoever. I wrote to Chord support about this and they appear to be clueless.


----------



## technobear

Atriya said:


> Has anyone had any issues with the Chord drivers for the Qutest, on Windows 10? Using these drivers, I have various problems when playing music upsampled beyond 192Khz: clicks, pops, electronic blips, sometimes even white noise on one or both channels, when using either HQPlayer or Roon to upsample. Strangely (to me), none of these problems arise if I simply uninstall the Chord drivers i.e. even though the device manager calls the Qutest an "unidentified device" with no drivers at all, it inexplicably plays (via both HQPlayer and Roon) a 768Khz/32-bit stream perfectly via USB, with no glitches whatsoever. I wrote to Chord support about this and they appear to be clueless.


Why are you upsampling on the PC when you have a Qutest?

That's like buying a dog and barking yourself! 

You should feed your Qutest a bit perfect signal at the native sample rate of the file.


----------



## Sense

Speaking of drivers...I didn't install the drivers on my Surface Pro X...I'm running the Windows 11 beta and it recognizes it as "Qutest". Not sure if that means anything.


----------



## Atriya (Sep 28, 2021)

technobear said:


> Why are you upsampling on the PC when you have a Qutest?
> 
> That's like buying a dog and barking yourself!
> 
> You should feed your Qutest a bit perfect signal at the native sample rate of the file.


Because HQPlayer is supposed to do such a good job at upscaling, that is it is apparently comparable not even to the upscaling of the Qutest with its 50k taps, but to the M Scaler with its 1 million taps!:

https://audiobacon.net/2021/03/17/hqplayer-better-than-a-5000-upscaler/

I'm personally not making any such claims myself. I'm just doing listening tests, and so far doing the upsampling with HQPlayer sounds better to me than letting the Qutest do it by itself.


----------



## Rukley

Looking for amo recommendations for the Qutest. Im looking at the SPL Phonitor X / XE, Qutest will be a stepping stone to the TT2 later on so would like to get an amp I can still use with that later on. Will eventually get a second tube amp.


----------



## RobertSM

Rukley said:


> Looking for amo recommendations for the Qutest. Im looking at the SPL Phonitor X / XE, Qutest will be a stepping stone to the TT2 later on so would like to get an amp I can still use with that later on. Will eventually get a second tube amp.



I own the qutest and till about a month ago also owned the Phonitor X. It's a outstanding pairing. The Phonitor X is a very neutral and linear amp. But please don't take that as cold or sterile because that's not the case at all. The pairing allows for the easy and detailed sound of the qutest to pair with the speed and refined muscle of the Phonitor X. It's a great combination and one that I'd highly recommend.


----------



## Christer (Sep 30, 2021)

technobear said:


> Why are you upsampling on the PC when you have a Qutest?
> 
> That's like buying a dog and barking yourself!
> 
> You should feed your Qutest a bit perfect signal at the native sample rate of the file.


Oops, mea culpa for "liking" the post!

 IMO actually  Very Strong opinion Qutest or any other Chord Dac should be fed  upsampled files via Mscaler!

Or possibly HQ Player? I have not tried HQ Player so I can not say how much of an improvement it adds over Qutest on its own. But I know for sure that Mscaler transforms Qutest from an ok dac into close to but not quite  SOTA territory.
Going up the ladder to TT2 and ultimately DAVE adds  more transparency but at very steep costs imho.

Another way of sending Qutest a  24/705 or 32/768 upsampled signal that I have tried with  some VERY interesting results would be PGGB.

According to those who have a really  optimised chain that is a clear improvement even over the current Mscaler with Chord dascs and some other dacs too.
Not endorsed by Rob, but he is now working on a quote: "much more advanced new  Mscaler".

Personally I love my Mscaler enough to hold off until things settle down a bit regarding PGGB versus a new Mscaler.

But I suspect that the cheapest but not most user friendly  way, to get the best SQ out of a Qutest might be PGGB  provided one has a competent enough computer to process and upsample  files to 24/705 or 32/768.
An  ideal playback format would probably be a NATIVELY recorded 32/768 file once DAVINA arrrives on the scene.
 But that is most probably still Years from now, and will most certainly NOT come cheap.
And neither will a new improved Mscaler I guess?
So if you want the best  possible SQ from your Chord dacs, DO try the above options for yourself.

Cheers CC


----------



## Atriya

Christer said:


> Oops, mea culpa for "liking" the post!
> 
> IMO actually  Very Strong opinion Qutest or any other Chord Dac should be fed  upsampled files via Mscaler!
> 
> ...


Very interesting. I've been testing HQPlayer for upsampling to the Qutest. (I can't (i.e. shouldn't) buy the M Scaler right now.) I'll try PGGB too then.


----------



## uzi2

PGGB must be worth a try. If only for the HHGTTG references...


----------



## Triode User (Oct 2, 2021)

Christer said:


> Personally I love my Mscaler enough to hold off until things settle down a bit regarding PGGB versus a new Mscaler.



Hi Christer, Hope you are well. With a Rob reported date due late next year for the new Mscaler we have plenty of time to save! I am anticipating nearer to Dave in pricing level though. 😬


----------



## Christer

Triode User said:


> Hi Christer, Hope you are well. With a Rob reported date due late next year for the new Mscaler we have plenty of time to save! I am anticipating nearer to Dave in pricing level though. 😬


Hi Nick, I am ok, but a bit frustrated over the fact that although I have had both my shots  there is almost  two months wait in line to renew my passport so no travels abroad this autumn for me. .But at least  I am quite happily  enjoying my music, both via Q/HMS and at my piano.  And your  personal take with your, quite optimised system, on PGGB versus Mscaler "1 " , putting costs like computer needed and storage needs aside, ie "what" is the current winner in pure SQ terms in your opinion?

Cheers CC


----------



## Atriya

uzi2 said:


> PGGB must be worth a try. If only for the HHGTTG references...


I started a PGGB trial, and upsampled some 44.1/16 tracks to 705/32 (various genres). I did some A/B testing between the upscaled and original tracks on the Qutest, using a Topping A90 amp and (Hifiman) HE6SE headphones. I was able to tell absolutely no difference between the two, and was completely guessing on most trials of the A/B process. Not a surprise that the results showed a near 50-50 ratio of right and wrong choices.


----------



## Triode User

Christer said:


> Hi Nick, I am ok, but a bit frustrated over the fact that although I have had both my shots  there is almost  two months wait in line to renew my passport so no travels abroad this autumn for me. .But at least  I am quite happily  enjoying my music, both via Q/HMS and at my piano.  And your  personal take with your, quite optimised system, on PGGB versus Mscaler "1 " , putting costs like computer needed and storage needs aside, ie "what" is the current winner in pure SQ terms in your opinion?
> 
> Cheers CC


Sorry to hear about the passport delays. I admit my passport expired about 4 years ago and I have not bothered to renew it because I am quite happy just riding my horses. 

On the PGGB vs Mscaler front a few weeks ago I reverted back to 100% Mscaler. This is mainly for convenience but at the moment my system is just sounding so good using the Mscaler/Dave that I do not find myself feeling inclined to chase after a different sound. Partly I think this is due to some upgraded DC4/ARC6 power supplies that I got for the Dave and Mscaler but also due to some other fine tuning I have been doing. Whatever the reason I am finding myself just playing music and enjoying it rather than feeling a need to fiddle with the system.

Also, I am now using Squeeze + Squeezelite on my Antipodes and I am waiting for the release of the new 3.1 software for the Antipodes and with it the ability to utilise the latest version of Squeeze + Squeezelite enabled play PGGB 705 and 768 files (I am limited to FS8 playback with the version of Squeeze/Squeezelite that I have available until I get the Antipodes software upgrade). 

When I do get that software update (promised weeks ago as per usual with such things!) I will be minded to play again with PGGB vs Mscaler. It will be interesting to see what I hear after the gap of not using PGGB files for playback.


----------



## briantrinh86

Atriya said:


> I'm having an issue with my brand new Qutest that I'm hoping someone can identify. Whenever I play a sample rate higher than 192Khz via USB (either by upscaling - I use Roon - or by playing DXD files), I get crackling and "warping"-sounding distortion. In fact at 384Khz I get the crackling and warping for a few seconds, and then a burst of "white noise". Anything lower than or at 192Khz plays fine. I'm using the official Chord drivers on Windows 10, and this happens when using both WASAPI and ASIO on Roon. My computer should be more than powerful enough (11th gen i7 processor), and in fact plays >192Khz files just fine through other DACs (e.g. Topping D90SE, which I tried for a while).


it happend to me the same . i heard some crackling noise from some tracks when playing qobuz on windows 10 . sometimes has sometime don't on the same track. i don't know it's a problem with my qutest or my amp hpa4 or with windows 10 through usb, or drivers issue


----------



## technobear

briantrinh86 said:


> it happend to me the same . i heard some crackling noise from some tracks when playing qobuz on windows 10 . sometimes has sometime don't on the same track. i don't know it's a problem with my qutest or my amp hpa4 or with windows 10 through usb, or drivers issue


The usual breakdown is something like:

90% - USB Cable

9.999% - Windows/App/PC Architecture

0.001% - DAC

0% - Headphone Amp


----------



## alekc

technobear said:


> The usual breakdown is something like:
> 
> 90% - USB Cable
> 
> ...


@technobear actually with Chord DACs I have quite the opposite experience. I agree that you can remove headphone amp from the equation. However Chord USB drivers are sensitive to some changes in my setups. For example changing from USB3 to USB2 port in my laptop introduces a lot of distortion. Secondly player settings are also crucial (and this is not relevant to Chord dacs only but at least with Audirvana I had most problems settings Chord dacs correctly, contrary to iFi for example). Maximum sampling rate, ASIO vs WASAPI vs Kernel Streaming (please note: this is note that I am not trying to start another debate which mode sounds best I am just making a point that this is one of the settings that can introduce some issues), upsampling, VST plugins, CPU settings - all those can play a crucial role. I only once had an issue due to USB cable. All other cases were software related. 

My experience applies to Mojo, Qutest and TT2 with Windows 10.


----------



## Atriya

alekc said:


> @technobear actually with Chord DACs I have quite the opposite experience. I agree that you can remove headphone amp from the equation. However Chord USB drivers are sensitive to some changes in my setups. For example changing from USB3 to USB2 port in my laptop introduces a lot of distortion. Secondly player settings are also crucial (and this is not relevant to Chord dacs only but at least with Audirvana I had most problems settings Chord dacs correctly, contrary to iFi for example). Maximum sampling rate, ASIO vs WASAPI vs Kernel Streaming (please note: this is note that I am not trying to start another debate which mode sounds best I am just making a point that this is one of the settings that can introduce some issues), upsampling, VST plugins, CPU settings - all those can play a crucial role. I only once had an issue due to USB cable. All other cases were software related.
> 
> My experience applies to Mojo, Qutest and TT2 with Windows 10.


In my case, the problem disappeared entirely simply by uninstalling the official Chord drivers. Now, the device apparently has no drivers, and shows as an "unidentified device" in my device manager, and yet, music at any sample rate plays flawlessly. Reinstalling the drivers re-introduced the warping and crackling.

I've told Chord support about this. Apparently they were unable to replicate the problem with their drivers, and promptly proceeded to ghost me, probably concluding that I am just imagining things.


----------



## Simple Man

I used to hear some clicks using the pc as a source.
After a few experiments I found out that using a new coaxcable iso usb, and an Ifi purifier solved the problem. 
Sound is more airy and I enjoy music more.


----------



## briantrinh86

Atriya said:


> In my case, the problem disappeared entirely simply by uninstalling the official Chord drivers. Now, the device apparently has no drivers, and shows as an "unidentified device" in my device manager, and yet, music at any sample rate plays flawlessly. Reinstalling the drivers re-introduced the warping and crackling.
> 
> I've told Chord support about this. Apparently they were unable to replicate the problem with their drivers, and promptly proceeded to ghost me, probably concluding that I am just imagining things.


i did tthe same thing and it was succesfully solved


----------



## Atriya

briantrinh86 said:


> i did tthe same thing and it was succesfully solved


Ah, so I'm not the only person who has this problem. Yet, to Chord Support, the problem doesn't exist, since they cannot replicate it.


----------



## Fugue (Oct 13, 2021)

Atriya said:


> Ah, so I'm not the only person who has this problem. Yet, to Chord Support, the problem doesn't exist, since they cannot replicate it.


See my post a few pages back--I couldn't play anything 96k or higher on my Windows laptop with the Qutest. Chord was initially helpful--even sent me a new driver, but nothing worked. Had to give up and use my MacBook Pro. You said it will play any resolution without a driver--does that include DSD?


----------



## Atriya

Fugue said:


> See my post a few pages back--I couldn't play anying 96k or higher on my Windows laptop with the Qutest. Chord was initially helpful--even sent me a new driver, but nothing worked. Had to give up and use my MacBook Pro. You said it will play any resolution without a driver--does that include DSD?


Wow, sorry to hear that. I haven't tried DSD, but PCM works even at 768Khz via USB. Very rarely (have only had it happen twice) the right channel breaks down into white noise. But otherwise, it works.


----------



## Sense

Atriya said:


> Very rarely (have only had it happen twice) the right channel breaks down into white noise. But otherwise, it works.


I think that happens with chord products if you plug in your source and play music too soon after the start up process.


----------



## Atriya

Sense said:


> I think that happens with chord products if you plug in your source and play music too soon after the start up process.


Ah, I see. Thanks; I didn't know that!


----------



## Fugue

If I'm brave enough to try it, I'm curious to see if Windows 11 works better.


----------



## wirefriend

I am testing Qutest and Hugo2 side by side and they sound differently with my current amp.
What amp should I use with Qutest to make it sound similar to Hugo2 (adding more colour / naturam timbre to Qutest without loosing microdynamics and details) ?


----------



## dbturbo2

wirefriend said:


> I am testing Qutest and Hugo2 side by side and they sound differently with my current amp.
> What amp should I use with Qutest to make it sound similar to Hugo2 (adding more colour / naturam timbre to Qutest without loosing microdynamics and details)


What is your current amp?


----------



## RobertSM

John Darko the reviewer said he *slightly* prefers the qutest to the Hugo 2. I've heard them both myself and they are very similar but I too *slightly* prefer the qutest. Especially with a good quality linear power supply, like the Sbooster.


----------



## Atriya

Fugue said:


> If I'm brave enough to try it, I'm curious to see if Windows 11 works better.


I just upgraded to Windows 11, and planning to try the Chord drivers on it. I doubt it will change much, as the drivers were made for Windows 10 (and don't work properly on them).


----------



## wirefriend

dbturbo2 said:


> What is your current amp?


SMSL SP400, THX-888. Very lineral / transparent. Doesn't colour Qutest's out as Hugo2's internal amp does.
I am looking for colourful / tonally rich amp for Qutest that doesn't loose the details.
Any advice?


----------



## IZONE

Atriya said:


> Ah, so I'm not the only person who has this problem. Yet, to Chord Support, the problem doesn't exist, since they cannot replicate it.


I'm not sure if this will help, but I had a similar experience with my Bifrost 2. I have a Qutest but this distortion issue only happened with my Bifrost 2 when using Foobar2000 and WASAPI Event Mode. When I switched to Push Mode the problem went away. I initially thought there was something wrong with the Bifrost 2 but it was the WASAPI plugin. To diagnose the problem try with different players and plugins even the standard Microsoft Windows Player. Try turning off WASAPI/ASIO and see if the problem persists


----------



## RobertSM

wirefriend said:


> SMSL SP400, THX-888. Very lineral / transparent. Doesn't colour Qutest's out as Hugo2's internal amp does.
> I am looking for colourful / tonally rich amp for Qutest that doesn't loose the details.
> Any advice?



Are you looking for soild-state, tube or hybrid amps?


----------



## Atriya (Oct 14, 2021)

Can anyone comment on what kind of isolation from noise and jitter the Qutest needs, when the source is a laptop? I read that Chord's FPGA architecture is highly resistant to jitter, and also the USB input of the Qutest is galvanically isolated. This seems to address both noise and jitter without the use of an external streamer (e.g. Pi4) or DDC. Is it really sufficient to simply connect a Qutest to a laptop directly via USB?

Also, is it reasonable to keep the laptop plugged in to mains, or should be laptop be running off its battery, to potentially reduce noise? I have the Qutest itself running off a battery, since I don't have a LPS at the moment.


----------



## RobertSM

Atriya said:


> Can anyone comment on what kind of isolation from noise and jitter the Qutest needs, when the source is a laptop? I read that Chord's FPGA architecture is highly resistant to jitter, and also the USB input of the Qutest is galvanically isolated. This seems to address both noise and jitter without the use of an external streamer (e.g. Pi4) or DDC. Is it really sufficient to simply connect a Qutest to a laptop directly via USB?
> 
> Also, is it reasonable to keep the laptop plugged in to mains, or should be laptop be running off its battery, to potentially reduce noise? I have the Qutest itself running off a battery, since I don't have a LPS at the moment.



I soley run qutest off a laptop that's plugged in. I have had zero issues with any noise. You are correct with Rob Watts and his FPGA algorithm jitter and noise or timing errors are basically none existent.

I do recommend at some point you consider a linear power supply. I've also added a power conditioner into my system which I run both my tube amp and qutest off of. I kept my laptop battery charger and cell phone charger off the power conditioner to isolate further.


----------



## JoinDivision

Atriya said:


> Ah, so I'm not the only person who has this problem. Yet, to Chord Support, the problem doesn't exist, since they cannot replicate it.


I experienced a similar issue. My player is Foobar and I'm using a Lenovo Yoga C940 laptop as source out of the USB-C into the Qutest.

Any file up to FLAC 16/44 would play flawlessly. Any file above that (24/96 upwards) would randomly distort, for a second or two and it would happen approximately once every 60 seconds.

I spent a couple of days methodically troubleshooting trying the usual things; adjusting all the settings in Foobar, the buffer etc. I even installed Latency Mon but there were no latency issues. I also went into device manager to disable the USB controller as others have suggested, in case it was interfering with the output signal.

Eventually through a process of elimination I discovered it was the laptops Bluetooth controller that was causing the problem. I use a Logitech MX Anywhere 3 mouse and connect to the laptop using Bluetooth, presumably the interference was caused by the mouse periodically checking it's connection to the Bluetooth controller. By disabling the laptops Bluetooth receiver the incidents of distortion ceased. It's a bit annoying because I have to use a dongle with the mouse and you have to sacrifice Bluetooth, but it solved the issue.

Give turning off Bluetooth a try, if you're source device has it, maybe it will work for you as well.


----------



## Womaz

Ok I am considering getting the Qutest to use with a new amp. 
I also subscribe to Roon. The qutest is Roon Ready. What does this mean?
Its is not Roon tested so whats the difference. is it just that Roon will recognise it If I am using Roon?


----------



## MatW

Womaz said:


> Ok I am considering getting the Qutest to use with a new amp.
> I also subscribe to Roon. The qutest is Roon Ready. What does this mean?
> Its is not Roon tested so whats the difference. is it just that Roon will recognise it If I am using Roon?


It's the other way around, Roon tested. See below for definitions.


----------



## IZONE

Atriya said:


> Can anyone comment on what kind of isolation from noise and jitter the Qutest needs, when the source is a laptop? I read that Chord's FPGA architecture is highly resistant to jitter, and also the USB input of the Qutest is galvanically isolated. This seems to address both noise and jitter without the use of an external streamer (e.g. Pi4) or DDC. Is it really sufficient to simply connect a Qutest to a laptop directly via USB?
> 
> Also, is it reasonable to keep the laptop plugged in to mains, or should be laptop be running off its battery, to potentially reduce noise? I have the Qutest itself running off a battery, since I don't have a LPS at the moment.


Yeah before I got the Qutest I read a lot of official statements from Chord / Rob that Qutest only needs the stock power adapter and USB cable... but a lot of people reported differences so I got curious. I bought iFi's iPower adapter and it made a noticeable difference for me, so much so that I went out and bought the iPower X which is a much more expensive adapter and experienced another bump in quality. I'm also using the iFi Silencer+ on my USB port. Sorry, I don't mean to come off as an iFi whore but my dealer only carries iFi for power/jitter needs. I'm not affiliated with iFi at all. I'm using a Furutech USB cable which is just a small level up from a basic cable. Oh and I also got myself a heavy-duty power strip with thicker gauges and more isolation from noise. Honestly, I wish I didn't hear a difference so I could save some coin but I do, so I'm leaving this for my fellow Chord Qutest lovers in case they want it as a data point. Also, kind of strange for me to say this but burn the F-out of the Qutest... seems to improve over time for me. This is of course all subjective and in my experience only. I don't recommend it to anyone unless you are curious like me


----------



## Atriya

JoinDivision said:


> I experienced a similar issue. My player is Foobar and I'm using a Lenovo Yoga C940 laptop as source out of the USB-C into the Qutest.
> 
> Any file up to FLAC 16/44 would play flawlessly. Any file above that (24/96 upwards) would randomly distort, for a second or two and it would happen approximately once every 60 seconds.
> 
> ...


I tried this, and it didn't work for me.


----------



## JoinDivision

Atriya said:


> I tried this, and it didn't work for me.





The Jester said:


> Windows device manager … find the USB port you’re using, select “properties” and you should find a box checked “ allow computer to turn off this device” … simply un check it …


That's frustrating. In my situation the issue was caused by a conflict caused by how the windows OS operates the device hardware, in my case the Bluetooth controller. It was causing interference to be picked up by the USB port. Have you been able to access the device manager and disable USB controllers, or other devices, one by one to see if you can identify the culprit? Perhaps it would be useful if you could try feeding the Qutest from another source, if you have another laptop or computer you could use, to confirm if the issue is originating from your laptop.


----------



## briantrinh86

ihave the issue when playing music on qobuz with chord qutest. some track over 96khz there has some noise appear around 10 seconds and go back to normal . i use chord qutest stock power supply. does anybody have this issue and know how to fix that?? thanks


----------



## Fugue

JoinDivision said:


> Give turning off Bluetooth a try, if you're source device has it, maybe it will work for you as well.



Are you freaking kidding me? All I had to do was turn off the Bluetooth? First of all, thank you so much! I can't believe what all I've gone through, including buying and returning two other Qutest DACS! (I was dangerously close to proving Einsten's definition of insanity...). Well, I'm one happy camper now. Thank you again.


----------



## RobertSM

Fugue said:


> Are you freaking kidding me? All I had to do was turn off the Bluetooth? First of all, thank you so much! I can't believe what all I've gone through, including buying and returning two other Qutest DACS! (I was dangerously close to proving Einsten's definition of insanity...). Well, I'm one happy camper now. Thank you again.



That's the beauty of this community. Like-minded people coming together and sharing in the same passions.


----------



## Fugue (Oct 15, 2021)

RobertSM said:


> That's the beauty of this community. Like-minded people coming together and sharing in the same passions.


I've posted about my problem in several other forums, and NO ONE else suggested the BlueTooth solution.


----------



## Fugue

Well, crap. The honeymoon is over: DSD files are terribly distorted again. It was nice while it lasted, but back to my MacBook Pro. I'm sick of Windblows.


----------



## RobertSM

Fugue said:


> Well, crap. The honeymoon is over: DSD files are terribly distorted again. It was nice while it lasted, but back to my MacBook Pro. I'm sick of Windblows.



Yep, that's exactly what I use to. An older MacBook Pro. I've never had any issues whatsoever.


----------



## briantrinh86

Fugue said:


> Well, crap. The honeymoon is over: DSD files are terribly distorted again. It was nice while it lasted, but back to my MacBook Pro. I'm sick of Windblows.


do u think the sbooster power supply can fix that issue. im using qobuz on windows 10 and it's has some terrible noise appear in about 10 second and go back to normal in some track 96khz or higher bit rate


----------



## RobertSM

@briantrinh86 -

Sbooster(which I own and I'm a big fan of) will only supply clean power to allow qutest to do the best job it can possibly do. If the issue is dirty noise that's coming thru a USB port or RFI or EMI or other such crosstalk coming in from external sources into the USB cable then Sbooster will do nothing for this.

Remember any and all cables can act as an aerial antenna to pick up noise that's all around us. That's why, we must try to keep our USB ports from injecting noise out. That's why we must try to use the best shielded cables that our budget allows. 

So circling back to your original question. Sbooster will only provide squeaky clean power to qutest. Dirty, noise from a USB port or noise pollution picked up from a cable, is something totally different.


----------



## briantrinh86

RobertSM said:


> @briantrinh86 -
> 
> Sbooster(which I own and I'm a big fan of) will only supply clean power to allow qutest to do the best job it can possibly do. If the issue is dirty noise that's coming thru a USB port or RFI or EMI or other such crosstalk coming in from external sources into the USB cable then Sbooster will do nothing for this.
> 
> ...


i don't think that is an issue with the usb because i swapped another usb cable the noise still occured. so annoying when u are enjoy music and a noise appear for around 5-7s


----------



## ctrlm

The worst thing about the Qutest for me has always been the the baffling decision to use micro USB for the power, especially with no dedicated power switch. 

For the last 6 months or so the connection has been getting flaky (opening up) using an aftermarket power supply so it's time to take her in and get a new micro USB inlet. I suck at soldering so I need to find someone to do it.


----------



## Jon L

ctrlm said:


> The worst thing about the Qutest for me has always been the the baffling decision to use micro USB for the power


This is my biggest complaint about Qutest as well.  Some aftermarket PS with micro USB connector seem to work intermittently with Qutest's micro USB jack, but I found this micro USB to DC adapter seems to fit perfectly into Qutest's micro USB jack even when other micro USB tips fail, so you might want to try this before spending more money:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B083LQSN4D/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&th=1


----------



## musickid

Can anyone comment on the upgrade to qutest when adding an mscaler? What differences does everyone hear.


----------



## slumberman

musickid said:


> Can anyone comment on the upgrade to qutest when adding an mscaler? What differences does everyone hear.


The difference is very noticeable. more space, definition, different according to genres of course, but otherwise it's a worthy upgrade in my opinion. Its just that most people don't want to consider such an expensive upgrade for a  much less expensive DAC. I purchased an M-Scaler for my Hugo2 first, only much later upgraded to a Dave when I AB/ed both in my environment with and without M Scaler for a while. I could have have been PERFECTLY happy with H2/Mscaler, but I felt the upgrade to Dave was worth it in the end, and I was at a stage in my life where it was something I could do financially without worrying too much, and for that I consider myself lucky.

I feel the Qutest/MScaler option is a GREAT one and will keep users happy for a LONG time, before thinking of upgrading to a better DAC, but that's just me!

This video was very helpful to me:

                          Chord M-Scaler & Qutest - Endgame or Pretendgame?


----------



## musickid

Anni designed and tuned for qutest+mscaler is what i'm thinking.


----------



## IZONE

If Chord designed a Half-M-Scaler with the same form factor as the Anni and Qutest that would be so awesome... Rob are you reading this?


----------



## JoinDivision

Fugue said:


> Well, crap. The honeymoon is over: DSD files are terribly distorted again. It was nice while it lasted, but back to my MacBook Pro. I'm sick of Windblows.


First I read where you said turning off Bluetooth worked for you and I was all like ☺️ but then I read further down and read it didn't completely work and I was all like 😞


----------



## RobertSM (Oct 16, 2021)

IZONE said:


> If Chord designed a Half-M-Scaler with the same form factor as the Anni and Qutest that would be so awesome... Rob are you reading this?



I would also be thrilled with a m-scaler with the qutest form factor.

Rob Watts has stated in the Rob Watts thread here on Head-Fi that he is working on new m-scalers.

It is helpful that Chord seems to be committed to the qutest line and form. We now have qutest(DAC), huei(phono stage),anni(headphone & speaker amp) all with the same shape as the original qutest. So this tells me that they are committed to this small footprint desktop form. I think it would be totally possible to create a very robust and powerful m-scaler for the qutest and keeping with the same form factor.


----------



## Atriya

JoinDivision said:


> First I read where you said turning off Bluetooth worked for you and I was all like ☺️ but then I read further down and read it didn't completely work and I was all like 😞


Are driver issues the kind of the thing that using a Raspberry Pi 4 streamer would solve? Say with an OS like RoPieee XL, I assume Windows drivers would no longer be needed or relevant?

Apart from the driver issue, does the Qutest stand to benefit sonically from using a low-noise streamer like the RPI given that the Qutest USB input is already galvanically isolated?


----------



## JoinDivision

Atriya said:


> Are driver issues the kind of the thing that using a Raspberry Pi 4 streamer would solve? Say with an OS like RoPieee XL, I assume Windows drivers would no longer be needed or relevant?
> 
> Apart from the driver issue, does the Qutest stand to benefit sonically from using a low-noise streamer like the RPI given that the Qutest USB input is already galvanically isolated?


I think if it isn't possible to identify and stop whichever process in your laptop is interrupting the kernel streaming then yes, you may have to look at procuring a replacement streaming solution.

I've got some other bro science ideas about it but I don't want to clutter the thread with potential misinformation so I'll pm you.


----------



## Fugue

At some point I'll probably switch to a streamer than has an internal HD for my files and ditch the laptop altogether.


----------



## Atriya (Oct 17, 2021)

I tried a different Windows laptop: an aging HP laptop from 2012, and the problem didn't arise (i.e. I was able to use the official Chord drivers to play D*X*D files without any issue.)

Now, I could buy a streaming device to solve the problem, but I'm not sure that _not _using the official Chord drivers (i.e. using the default Windows drivers) actually is a bad thing. Even using the default windows drivers, Roon is _still _able to play bit-perfect audio using the device in exclusive mode (i.e. the sound does _not _pass through the Windows mixer), and the Qutest still receives the digital signal in whatever sample rate I play, right up to 768Khz (as evidenced by the color of light in the glass window). It may therefore be a perfectly acceptable solution to simply not use the official drivers, at least if ASIO is not a requirement.


----------



## MatW

Fugue said:


> At some point I'll probably switch to a streamer than has an internal HD for my files and ditch the laptop altogether.


I suggest looking into Roon. I use a Roon Nucleus, but you can use the laptop as the Roon core as well. The streamer (or more, one of the great benefits of Roon) needs to be Roon ready.


----------



## JoinDivision

Fugue said:


> At some point I'll probably switch to a streamer than has an internal HD for my files and ditch the laptop altogether.


Are you using a modern ultrabook by any chance? Myself and Atriya both were and think they are the source of the issue.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

wirefriend said:


> SMSL SP400, THX-888. Very lineral / transparent. Doesn't colour Qutest's out as Hugo2's internal amp does.
> I am looking for colourful / tonally rich amp for Qutest that doesn't loose the details.
> Any advice?



No, it is the other way around. Your SMSL amps actually colouring the sound of Hugo 2 (with SMSL's neutral-bright character). There is no amp on earth that has less coloration than Hugo 2 headphone out (if you use Hugo 2 as DAC), because Hugo 2 doesn't use amplification board. What you heard from headphone out is direct from output stage of DAC itself.


----------



## u2u2

Fugue said:


> At some point I'll probably switch to a streamer than has an internal HD for my files and ditch the laptop altogether.


This is the route to Qutest happiness or go the server route for music you really care deeply about. I left the Windows world due to the abomination known as Vista and crossed over to Apple only. One benefit was I don't overtly experience the multitude of computer issues related to on this thread. Finally added a streaming device and a server. The server on BNC to the Qutest is amazing. Internal SSD in my case. You don't know what was there until it is gone. Abyss recently posted a Top of the Line video that touches on computers and noise issues in general. Gives some food for thought. Awaiting Anni for more Qutest adventures.


----------



## Fugue

MatW said:


> I suggest looking into Roon. I use a Roon Nucleus, but you can use the laptop as the Roon core as well. The streamer (or more, one of the great benefits of Roon) needs to be Roon ready.


Unless they've changed the design, I don't like the inability to create playlists on Roon. Audirvana is much better in that regard.


----------



## Atriya

Has anyone noticed that on the Qutest:

1. The various sample rate colors don't actually match those in the manual.
2. While the colors (while not matching the manual) do vary with the sample rate, the colors for 705.6Khz and 768Khz are exactly the same i.e. there is no change, unlike what is given in the manual, and contrary to the whole purpose of having distinct colors for distinct sample rates. But, the color I see for 705.6/768 is indeed different from the color for 384, which is different from the color for 352.8: otherwise I would have started to suspect that I'm not outputting 705.6/768 at all.


----------



## MatW

Fugue said:


> Unless they've changed the design, I don't like the inability to create playlists on Roon. Audirvana is much better in that regard.


You can create playlists in Roon, no problem. And/or convert imported playlists to Roon playlists, with two clicks.


----------



## Fugue (Oct 17, 2021)

MatW said:


> You can create playlists in Roon, no problem. And/or convert imported playlists to Roon playlists, with two clicks.


Even from Qobuz? I recall different ways to arrange Qobuz or downloaded files (album, artist, date added, etc.) but not playlists they Qobuz and Audirvana do it. They maintain all of the tracks as a group--I just click on the album cover I want to play, and it opens up to reveal the individual tracks. As I recall, Roon just listed them as individual tracks, which can be a pain for many classical titles that sometimes have dozens of tracks! For instance, here is an image of a fragment of one playlist followed by what it looks like when I click on a cover image. (Again, just a fragment of the contained tracks.) Does Roon come close to this?


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 17, 2021)

I wonder how this would sound:
Anybody tried it yet?

chordelectronics.co.uk/product/anni


----------



## MatW

Fugue said:


> Even from Qobuz? I recall different ways to arrange Qobuz or downloaded files (album, artist, date added, etc.) but not playlists they Qobuz and Audirvana do it. They maintain all of the tracks as a group--I just click on the album cover I want to play, and it opens up to reveal the individual tracks. As I recall, Roon just listed them as individual tracks, which can be a pain for many classical titles that sometimes have dozens of tracks! For instance, here is an image of a fragment of one playlist followed by what it looks like when I click on a cover image. (Again, just a fragment of the contained tracks.) Does Roon come close to this?


I don't know when you last used Roon, sounds like a long time ago. What you're describing is pretty basic and of course that works fine in Roon. Maybe give it another try, you can just subscribe for a month and check it out.

Anyway, let's get back to the Qutest.


----------



## u2u2

Reactcore said:


> I wonder how this would sound:
> Anybody tried it yet?
> 
> chordelectronics.co.uk/product/anni


A UK member with one posted brief comment in the Anni thread. A teaser that he says he will followup on when he has more time... Another tried one at a show. Favourable but rather little info so far. A couple of US dealers appeared poised for deliveries in the next few days.


----------



## Rob Watts

ctrlm said:


> The worst thing about the Qutest for me has always been the the baffling decision to use micro USB for the power, especially with no dedicated power switch.
> 
> For the last 6 months or so the connection has been getting flaky (opening up) using an aftermarket power supply so it's time to take her in and get a new micro USB inlet. I suck at soldering so I need to find someone to do it.



Qutest when on but not processing is only 2W of power. Electronics are more reliable if on for 24/7 too, if you run the semiconductors at low temperature - which of course is the case for Qutest. So it was intended to leave it on permanently.



IZONE said:


> If Chord designed a Half-M-Scaler with the same form factor as the Anni and Qutest that would be so awesome... Rob are you reading this?



Yes I am reading this! Power dissipation is a major issue, the second issue is an FPGA that would do 0.5M taps at an appropriate price too - there isn't one available currently, nor is there one coming soon either.


----------



## Christer (Oct 18, 2021)

Rob Watts said:


> Qutest when on but not processing is only 2W of power. Electronics are more reliable if on for 24/7 too, if you run the semiconductors at low temperature - which of course is the case for Qutest. So it was intended to leave it on permanently.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I am reading this! Power dissipation is a major issue, the second issue is an FPGA that would do 0.5M taps at an appropriate price too - there isn't one available currently, nor is there one coming soon either.


I have to say that I fully agree with ctrlm on this.

 Sorry to be a bit blunt again but the micro usb is a REALLY BAD  "penny pinching" choice imo!!

Why did you choose such a flimsy little connection as on Hugo???
I  mainly use my Qutest with a battery powered psu that definitely  to my ears sounds better and more realistic than the supplied "thingy".

 With the battery powered one I get the benefits  of darker, warmer, less harsh or hard and  fuller, more timbrally correct SQ from acoustic instruments I quite often actually know how they  really sounded live in the hall  at the actual recording ie the benefits  you so often mention when discussing RF, RFI groundloop  or whatever problems  I get when using the supplied one which unfortunately I have to when the battery runs out of power and I have to plug in the other one.
Qutest is a very  good little dac but deserved better than just micro usb, cheap smps and only one set of Rca connections too imo.
My Benchmark HGC 2 in the same price range as Qutest, which I only use as a very good headphone amp with my Qutest has SOO many connections both rca and balanced.
Regarding a " Half Mscaler" I can not see any need for a such a product  whatsoever ,but  I hope you are working hard on the  Mscaler X with I guess at least 10 M taps or more.

Cheers CC


----------



## IZONE

Rob Watts said:


> Qutest when on but not processing is only 2W of power. Electronics are more reliable if on for 24/7 too, if you run the semiconductors at low temperature - which of course is the case for Qutest. So it was intended to leave it on permanently.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I am reading this! Power dissipation is a major issue, the second issue is an FPGA that would do 0.5M taps at an appropriate price too - there isn't one available currently, nor is there one coming soon either.


Wow! thanks for the direct response Rob! And thanks for the detailed explanation. I want to tell you that the Qutest is a fantastic product! 

I really respect people who do original things and love that you are tackling the digital audio problem in a way no one else is doing. Some day when FPGA processing power and your coding upgrades hit the singularity, I will move through space and time and end up in a recording studio in the 90s somewhere. I'll send a younger Rob a message


----------



## musickid

705/768 colours are subtle but the difference is there on inspection.


----------



## Atriya

musickid said:


> 705/768 colours are subtle but the difference is there on inspection.


I inspected the best I could with my naked eye, and there is none on my Qutest. Surely, one should not have to buy a spectrometer to tell the sample rate one's DAC is playing.

Also, Chord support says they see no difference (in color) playing 705 vs 768 from an MScaler.


----------



## musickid

Is a 0.5m rca cable ok to use or is it better to go 1m with qutest to amp?


----------



## Atriya

musickid said:


> Is a 0.5m rca cable ok to use or is it better to go 1m with qutest to amp?


0.5m should be more than enough. I use a 10 cm, though it's a bit inconvenient.


----------



## musickid

Thanks Atirya. I'm looking at chord clearway rca interconnect.


----------



## Womaz

I seem to recall a review where it said dont use it with Hifi market cables??? Stick with what is in the box?? Dont shoot the messenger, but I cant quite remember which review as I have read that many.......Although I do stand to be corrected.


----------



## maxh22

musickid said:


> Is a 0.5m rca cable ok to use or is it better to go 1m with qutest to amp?



musickid are trading in your Dave for Qutest M scaler?


----------



## musickid (Oct 20, 2021)

Possibly and Anni, wave stream cables etc. Will soon be the proud owner of anni, qutest, mscaler, qutest stands.....and the story continues.


----------



## Blackbriar0216

Is it worth getting proper RCA interconnect to connect my qutest to Burson soloist 3x with expectation of noticeable sound improvement ? I am using VC with the it. I am using Audioquest golden gate at the moment. Does RCA interconnect cables really bring noticeable difference ? If so, How ?


----------



## alxw0w

Blackbriar0216 said:


> Is it worth getting proper RCA interconnect to connect my qutest to Burson soloist 3x with expectation of noticeable sound improvement ? I am using VC with the it. I am using Audioquest golden gate at the moment. Does RCA interconnect cables really bring noticeable difference ? If so, How ?


What you mean by proper RCA ? Your current AQ seems to be reasonable one.
Try to demo some more "Hi-end" cable at home with your system and decide if it's worth the extra money.
Some people swear by expensive cables, but others say that is just a snake oil. So as always check by yourself and decide with your ears/money


----------



## musickid (Oct 22, 2021)

I'll be using chord clearway 0.5m if that helps at £90 to connect qutest to anni. A system is only as strong as it's weakest link IMHO..


----------



## Blackbriar0216

alxw0w said:


> What you mean by proper RCA ? Your current AQ seems to be reasonable one.
> Try to demo some more "Hi-end" cable at home with your system and decide if it's worth the extra money.
> Some people swear by expensive cables, but others say that is just a snake oil. So as always check by yourself and decide with your ears/money


Proper I meant by - High end. I will hit local audio shop to give it a try sometime. Cheers.


----------



## Blackbriar0216

musickid said:


> I'll be using chord clearway 0.5m if that helps at £90 to connect qutest to anni. A system is only as strong as it's weakest link IMHO..


I will put that in my list. Cheers.


----------



## Christer (Oct 22, 2021)

musickid said:


> Thanks Atirya. I'm looking at chord clearway rca interconnect.


I bought Chord Clearway rca cables  in Singapore to be able to use my Qutest from day one with my Benchmark HGC2 headphone amp.
But in my  system both  via headphones and speakers at home  I use a clearly more refined Chord Indigo Blue which lets my Qutest deliver more of what  is actually on the recordings without hardening at climaxes, than Clearway allows.
Clearway is  quite an ok, budget cable imho. But Qutest is definitely  good enough to reveal a slight hardness when using budget cables like Clearway.
As far as cables are concerned Rca cables can make quite difference with well recorded  complex  acoustic music imho.
The differences being a bit similar and even more obvious to what many hear between the stock BNC with Mscaler and  upgrade ones like Wave cables.
I personally  clearly prefer Wave Storm over Stream with most recordings for similar reasons I also much prefer my Indigo Blue rca over both Clearway and three different Audioquest rca cables  I still have  lying around but only used during travels.
Fuller, warmer, darker and lets me play louder without hardening.
Unfortunately big extra costs involved in both cases.
But with RCA cables there are lots of second hand but very good ones out there to choose from.
I think I understand why cable build matters  with RCA cables carrying an analogue signal.
 But I am still a bit puzzled why copper in one and silver in the other but the same number of Ferrites in both  BNCs  can make such an easily audible difference as they do in my systems ?
 I hope you haven´t lost too much hard earned cash  from your "Dave only", adventure, but interesting to read that you missed the Mscaler too much in the long run.
For me the main reason owning a Chord dac ,is the  Mscaler.
Cheers  CC


----------



## alxw0w

Blackbriar0216 said:


> Proper I meant by - High end. I will hit local audio shop to give it a try sometime. Cheers.


Yup that's the best what you can do.
But remember try to get demo @ your home.
Live with it for couple of days and compare to your current AQ.
Demos in a store are far from being perfect.


----------



## musickid (Oct 22, 2021)

Hi Christer,

Silver is a better conductor than copper think electron flow i think. I replaced my pm1 copper cable with a silver artisan headphone cable and the soundstage opened up. I got an excellent deal trading my dave for a new anni, qutest and mscaler. Had i sold my dave privately and used the funds to purchase the 3 components i would have been in pocket by just a few hundred pounds. A price i'm willing to pay for the peace of mind of dealing with a reputable dealer. Totally agree about the mscaler without which there is little soul hence my move back towards it.

Why i didn't just add an mscaler to my dave is a long winded story of mixed personal needs and objectives fused with a carefully thought out series of logical deductions involving an even longer process of elimination the conclusion of which was anni, qutest, mscaler. Think Oppo PM1 the only hi end headphone i'm comfortable wearing after auditioning so many others over the years. After hearing anni and qutest....as time goes by...it had to be you.


----------



## musickid




----------



## Triode User

musickid said:


> Hi Christer,
> 
> Silver is a better conductor than copper think electron flow i think. I replaced my pm1 copper cable with a silver artisan headphone cable and the soundstage opened up. I got an excellent deal trading my dave for a new anni, qutest and mscaler. Had i sold my dave privately and used the funds to purchase the 3 components i would have been in pocket by just a few hundred pounds. A price i'm willing to pay for the peace of mind of dealing with a reputable dealer. Totally agree about the mscaler without which there is little soul hence my move back towards it.
> 
> Why i didn't just add an mscaler to my dave is a long winded story of mixed personal needs and objectives fused with a carefully thought out series of logical deductions involving an even longer process of elimination the conclusion of which was anni, qutest, mscaler.


mk, You will be pleased with the Qutest. I absolutely loved the sound of my Qutest. I think it is a tremendous DAC.

But please keep your mind open to trying a third party power supply even though I know this is not your natural inclination to go in that direction. 👍😀


----------



## Atriya (Oct 23, 2021)

Triode User said:


> mk, You will be pleased with the Qutest. I absolutely loved the sound of my Qutest. I think it is a tremendous DAC.
> 
> But please keep your mind open to trying a third party power supply even though I know this is not your natural inclination to go in that direction. 👍😀


Talking of third-party power supplies: what are some opinions on how a simple battery pack (the kind you get in airports to keep your phone charged during the flight, but has the right 5V and current ratings, of course) compares to (1) the stock PSU and (2) a good but inexpensive LPS like the Allo Shanti (not looking to spend more than $200 on an LPS).


----------



## Triode User

Atriya said:


> Talking of third-party power supplies: what are some opinions on how a simple battery pack (the kind you get in airports to keep your phone charged during the flight, but has the right 5V and current ratings, of course) compares to (1) the stock PSU and (2) a good but inexpensive LPS like the Allo Shanti (not looking to spend more than $200 on an LPS).


I tried various powering options with the Qutest and I did do a post on the Chord Electronics Owners Group on FaceBook at the time. I was not impressed with the sound using the sort of battery pack you mention. The sound using the Allo Shanti was very good value for money but when I got my soldering iron out and replaced the Allo Shanti captive DC leads the sound improved even more. I did not try it but it might be that it can similarly improved more simply just by shortening those factory installed DC leads. As well as not being great they are also ridiculously long. Shorten them to perhaps 60cm or 80cm will help But as I say I have not actually tried that because by then the whole of the Shanti DC lead was in the bin!


----------



## Blackbriar0216

Triode User said:


> But please keep your mind open to trying a third party power supply even though I know this is not your natural inclination to go in that direction. 👍😀


I used IFI ipower X power supply for qutest and I couldnt notice any difference. I think Ipower x was bit brighter. Thats all.


----------



## Triode User

Blackbriar0216 said:


> I used IFI ipower X power supply for qutest and I couldnt notice any difference. I think Ipower x was bit brighter. Thats all.


I have tried all sorts including cheap Chinese LPS, MCRU, battery pack, Allo Shanti, Sbooster, Farad Super3, Sean Jacobs DC3 and lately his DC4. I originally thought that the latter was a ridiculously expensive power supply (£4,000) to use with the Qutest but then on reflection and comparing the combination with other similar priced DACs (ie around £5,200) I kept finding myself preferring the Qutest + DC4. So maybe it is not such a silly idea but the reality is that I did not buy the DC4 specifically for the Qutest and only tried it because I had bought it for another DAC (the Dave).


----------



## Blackbriar0216

Triode User said:


> I have tried all sorts including cheap Chinese LPS, MCRU, battery pack, Allo Shanti, Sbooster, Farad Super3, Sean Jacobs DC3 and lately his DC4. I originally thought that the latter was a ridiculously expensive power supply (£4,000) to use with the Qutest but then on reflection and comparing the combination with other similar priced DACs (ie around £5,200) I kept finding myself preferring the Qutest + DC4. So maybe it is not such a silly idea but the reality is that I did not buy the DC4 specifically for the Qutest and only tried it because I had bought it for another DAC (the Dave).


Yeah I can only justify of using various psu for qutest so much to an extent. I said to myself. I am going to try ifi ipowerx and thats it as far as psu goes for Qutest. I might look into it when I upgrade my dac later down the path.


----------



## Jon L

Triode User said:


> Shorten them to perhaps 60cm or 80cm will help But as I say I have not actually tried that because by then the whole of the Shanti DC lead was in the bin!


After installing a DC jack and trying all kinds of exotic wire for Shanti, in order to preserve the stock tonality and sound signature while only improving the bass weight and overall density, I ended up using a short run of Shanti Stock DC wire doubled up.  For DC application, (shorter) length and (larger) diameter should be maximized ime.


----------



## al210

Just ordered the Cutest. It will be replacing my 5 year old 2qute. Hope I’ll see a nice improvement.

I’ve been reading through the 100s of posts in this thread. Some good info!

There has been a lot of discussion about power supplies for the Cutest. I just ordered the linear PS from Small Green Computer.


----------



## TheRH (Oct 24, 2021)

Does Windows 11 sound better? I will be using Roon and an SPL Phonitor SE with a pair of Audeze LCD-2C's.


----------



## GreenBow (Oct 24, 2021)

musickid said:


> I'll be using chord clearway 0.5m if that helps at £90 to connect qutest to anni. A system is only as strong as it's weakest link IMHO..



I have some Chord Clearway RCA, and I would say they are a touch on the bright side. Not a lot, but leaning bright.


----------



## briantrinh86

Does anyone have a chance to compare the Qutest with the benchmark dac3?


----------



## Atriya

Has anyone tried these cables:

https://shenzhenaudio.com/products/...pper-gold-plated-rca-professional-audio-cable

This is what I'm using, with a Topping A90 amp.


----------



## Rukley

TheRH said:


> Does Windows 11 sound better? I will be using Roon and an SPL Phonitor SE with a pair of Audeze LCD-2C's.


If you properly disable all the windows sound enhancements and crap so that you're just sending straight to your DAC and the the DAC is doing all the work they should sound the same.


----------



## musickid

So far absolutely outstanding.


----------



## musickid (Oct 26, 2021)

Some serious feedback and comparisons soon.


----------



## maxh22

musickid said:


> So far absolutely outstanding.


Glad you are enjoying it! The trio looks magnificent with all the different colors and whatnot, enjoy!

My next move is to add the M Scaler to my Dave and I saw several used ones around the low $3K mark but with a potentially new m scaler coming next year it gets me thinking what could be next?


----------



## musickid (Oct 26, 2021)

The lights are nice but it sounds absolutely mind blowing with many different styles. I've had mojo, h2, mh2, mtt2 and dave but this combination excels over all of them and i'm looking at it from a completely unbiased neutral POV. This is the best i've heard chord through any headphone. The natural analogue signature of the mscaler combined with the ultra refined bass rumble of anni is intoxicating. My favourite tracks are reborn.


----------



## alxw0w

musickid said:


> So far absolutely outstanding.


Nice, where are the wave storms ?


----------



## musickid (Oct 26, 2021)

With the maker.. i just received the trio today i'm looking at stream wave to arrive shortly. It's a must to complete the set up. An essential component imho. I've counted 10 new lights tonight including the internal diodes.


----------



## alekc

musickid said:


> The lights are nice but it sounds absolutely mind blowing with many different styles. I've had mojo, h2, mh2, mtt2 and dave but this combination excels over all of them and i'm looking at it from a completely unbiased neutral POV. This is the best i've heard chord through any headphone. The natural analogue signature of the mscaler combined with the ultra refined bass rumble of anni is intoxicating. My favourite tracks are reborn.


@musickid would you care to tell us more about HTT2 vs Qutest/Anni in headphones setup please? Just when I almost decided on my new dac and amp I have read your post and now I am at point 0 again


----------



## musickid (Oct 26, 2021)

I rarely used tt2 without mscaler but tt2 is smooth, effortless and powerful probably suiting more power hungry headphones even though it has low gain. It's a complete system in itself. The problem i found with my pm1and tt2 is that tt2 was a bit heavy sounding for me and spoiled some albums i listened too but by no means all of them. Anni has 10w but with the trio mqutest there is better synergy with my pm1. I heard it beforehand with sensitive headphones too. A new qutest anni is roughly £2350 a tt2 is £4250. If you're looking for a long term solution/ system and can afford it go tt2 but if you only have a few easy to drive headphones and you use at arms reach anni/qutest is the way to go imho. You can always add speakers to anni. The anni/qutest sound is very full and encompassing and the size of anni is deceptive. You can't go wrong either way.


----------



## Nostoi

musickid said:


> I rarely used tt2 without mscaler but tt2 is smooth, effortless and powerful probably suiting more power hungry headphones even though it has low gain. It's a complete system in itself. The problem i found with my pm1and tt2 is that tt2 was a bit heavy sounding for me and spoiled some albums i listened too but by no means all of them. Anni has 10w but with the trio mqutest there is better synergy with my pm1. I heard it beforehand with sensitive headphones too. A new qutest anni is roughly £2350 a tt2 is £4250. If you're looking for a long term solution/ system and can afford it go tt2 but if you only have a few easy to drive headphones and you use at arms reach anni/qutest is the way to go imho. You can always add speakers to anni. The anni/qutest sound is very full and encompassing and the size of anni is deceptive. You can't go wrong either way.


Interesting, thanks. 

£2350, yes, but then you add the two Chord system stands (which seem to be a must have), you're looking at £2850, which is not far from the price of a 2nd hand TT2.


----------



## alekc

musickid said:


> I rarely used tt2 without mscaler but tt2 is smooth, effortless and powerful probably suiting more power hungry headphones even though it has low gain. It's a complete system in itself. The problem i found with my pm1and tt2 is that tt2 was a bit heavy sounding for me and spoiled some albums i listened too but by no means all of them. Anni has 10w but with the trio mqutest there is better synergy with my pm1. I heard it beforehand with sensitive headphones too. A new qutest anni is roughly £2350 a tt2 is £4250. If you're looking for a long term solution/ system and can afford it go tt2 but if you only have a few easy to drive headphones and you use at arms reach anni/qutest is the way to go imho. You can always add speakers to anni. The anni/qutest sound is very full and encompassing and the size of anni is deceptive. You can't go wrong either way.


Thank you @musickid for sharing your experience. I like downsizing, so HTT2 appeals to me in way that I could connect it directly with USB and be done. Obviously sooner or later there would be an urge to add M Scaler so single box solution would be no longer applicable. The setup I am thinking about is actually separate dac and headphone amp so it would be not be a single box solution like HTT2 and the price is also higher. On the other hand I've heard some dacs both using off-the-shelf chips and R2R implementation that I prefer over HTT2 but I really like HTT2 as headphone amp but... there are still some amps I really like and I know I would like to eventually add one of them to the chain... the audiophile dilemmas are tough 

So far I've heard Qutest without Anni and I am not impressed. No surprise since I've preferred Mojo sound signature over H2/Qutest and the next logical step in Chord line is TT2. What keeps me away from Anni is internal fan. I suppose you do not care that much about Qutest/TT2 sound signature difference?


----------



## maxh22

musickid said:


> I rarely used tt2 without mscaler but tt2 is smooth, effortless and powerful probably suiting more power hungry headphones even though it has low gain. It's a complete system in itself. The problem i found with my pm1and tt2 is that tt2 was a bit heavy sounding for me and spoiled some albums i listened too but by no means all of them. Anni has 10w but with the trio mqutest there is better synergy with my pm1. I heard it beforehand with sensitive headphones too. A new qutest anni is roughly £2350 a tt2 is £4250. If you're looking for a long term solution/ system and can afford it go tt2 but if you only have a few easy to drive headphones and you use at arms reach anni/qutest is the way to go imho. You can always add speakers to anni. The anni/qutest sound is very full and encompassing and the size of anni is deceptive. You can't go wrong either way.



How would you describe the sound of Anni vs the H2mscaler combo you had before?


----------



## musickid (Oct 26, 2021)

I actually found tt2 too heavy sounding with my oppo pm1 but not always just on selected albums. Anni/qutest is more controlled than h2, drives my headphones with more rigour and digs deep into my planar magnetic 1 and i hear bass rumbles which i have not heard before with the chord dacs on their own. A smooth bass rumble not at all distorted. I can switch anni off from the mains which i couldn't when leaving h2 in desktop mode. Anni and qutest mscaled for me at least is a big step up from mhugo 2 in sound and in the pride of owning the system and stacking it on the qutest stands. This stack is a system to be reckoned with....small but easily equalling and beating many full size amps and integrated hifi systems around the thousand pound price and above which are intended to power speakers in small to medium size rooms. Here i mean anni/qutest on their own without mscaler.


----------



## musickid

A great day for me and now i'll move over and give space. Thanks to everyone for following my adventure.


----------



## IZONE

Atriya said:


> Has anyone tried these cables:
> 
> https://shenzhenaudio.com/products/...pper-gold-plated-rca-professional-audio-cable
> 
> This is what I'm using, with a Topping A90 amp.


Yeah I have that exact cable in the 25cm version. It's a good cable... well at least better than generic stuff that comes in the box with most products. I consider it kind of a "sane" cable without spending hundreds of dollars. I noticed a small bump in quality from Schiit's cables. Topping makes good stuff at good prices IMO


----------



## TheMiddleSky

musickid said:


> Some serious feedback and comparisons soon.


Ani definitely more colourful that I thought it would be. Especially because of the colour on volume pot. Anyway, they look cool and quirky at the same time, which is kind of... nice actually.


----------



## musickid (Oct 27, 2021)

The volume control colours indicate which analogue input 1 or 2 not the volume. This is chosen by pressing the volume dial and you get different colours depending which input is chosen.


----------



## alekc

musickid said:


> A great day for me and now i'll move over and give space. Thanks to everyone for following my adventure.


And what a great adventure is was... and still is I suppose...   at least from my end: big "thank you" for sharing it with us @musickid


----------



## musickid (Oct 28, 2021)

With 1V vs 2V out from qutest into anni i find that it is not just a simple question of 2V being slightly louder but that with 2V the music sounds more complete and correct than with 1V out. It took just a couple of tracks and was immediately apparent. So anni plays perfectly with 2V out from qutest IMHO but important to note that in the anni manual it states that line level in should be _no higher than 2V._

Can anyone help me and confirm qutest dual data mode with mscaler....that the input light colour is not pure blue but has a touch of cyan to it?


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 28, 2021)

I find the colour of input button light-greenish next to the white selected filter button.

I use MQutest almost a year now.. and compared to combined with my Questyle Current mode amp.. direct out to my HP extracts just a bit more texture to the sound. Remember it has Mojo's OP stage.

As Rob stated: the less links in the chain.. the better clarity, without external amp its internal signal path is as short as TT.

Maybe you should try it once..


----------



## musickid (Oct 28, 2021)

Anni was designed to be very transparent when combined with qutest with anni playing seamlessly with qutest. When i heard them both together all worries concerning transparency vanished. I don't have the courage nor the desire to use a non chord amp with qutest let alone go qutest direct to headphone. Thanks for confirming the colour looks right to me.


----------



## reggiegasket

I don't have an Anni, but my 2p is that 2V sounds better than 1V, into a Hegel H120.

Also, I've been testing the Qutest against the Hegel's inbuilt DAC this week, which has been interesting. The Qutest is better, as expected, but on well-recorded tracks it's quite close. The key difference is that the Hegel DAC is brighter, more forward, and with a flatter soundstage. The Qutest is smoother and, most importantly, less fatiguing.


----------



## LevPush

It's funny...I just got a Qutest hooked up with my speaker system(Exposure 3510+ATC 11) and was A/Bing with my Metrum Onyx dac by grouping them in roon and changing the inputs on my amp. I literally can't hear much of a difference between the two dac although the two are so different in architecture. I really did not expect that. Maybe the Qutest has a bit more focus sound and Onyx has a bit more mid-range? It was def very baffling. The difference comparing these two with the Mojo was clear as day.


----------



## Triode User

LevPush said:


> It's funny...I just got a Qutest hooked up with my speaker system(Exposure 3510+ATC 11) and was A/Bing with my Metrum Onyx dac by grouping them in roon and changing the inputs on my amp. I literally can't hear much of a difference between the two dac although the two are so different in architecture. I really did not expect that. Maybe the Qutest has a bit more focus sound and Onyx has a bit more mid-range? It was def very baffling. The difference comparing these two with the Mojo was clear as day.


I never find that method of A/B comparison much use apart from when there are glaring differences (The Holo May for instance only took 10 minutes to realise how much better the Qutest is!). I much prefer to listen just to one dac for say a couple of days and then change and do the same with the other.


----------



## Semper HiFi

Has anyone upgraded to the Qutest from a Multibit DAC such as the Bifrost or Gungnir? I'm hesitant to stray from the R2R\ladder\Multibit family of DACs but it sounds like the FPGA technology in the Chord makes it quite different than other delta sigma DACs.


----------



## The Jester

Can’t claim to have heard a lot of the DAC’s out there but from when CD first arrived I always thought there was “something missing” until after lots of auditioning over the years I heard and then bought the Qutest, followed shortly after by the MScaler, now for the first time in the last few years I’m looking at upgrading cartridges for my Vinyl collection.


----------



## IZONE

Semper HiFi said:


> Has anyone upgraded to the Qutest from a Multibit DAC such as the Bifrost or Gungnir? I'm hesitant to stray from the R2R\ladder\Multibit family of DACs but it sounds like the FPGA technology in the Chord makes it quite different than other delta sigma DACs.


I own a Bifrost 2 and Qutest together. Qutest sounds like a delta sigma dac with more rounded edges in the transients, also better transient timing, removing the harshness of traditional Delta Sigma / general haziness + it digs out more details + clarity (traditional strengths of D/S). It doesn't sound like an R2R or D/S but somewhere in between with the benefits of both, but if I had to say it does sound closer to Delta Sigma (which it is). Bifrost 2 sounds thick / musical / analog but a bit veiled compared to the Qutest, still nice level of details/clarity of course. Also In My Humble Experience the Qutest really benefits from burn-in and upgrading the power adapter / power supply / USB cable. I also use a small USB dongle to mitigate jitter/noise. Before these small adjustment the Qutest sounded even more D/S but it is now closer to R2R sounding than before to my ears and a beautiful thing of art. I wish Schiit would license their Unison USB tech to Chord. That mating would sound amazing.


----------



## LevPush

Semper HiFi said:


> Has anyone upgraded to the Qutest from a Multibit DAC such as the Bifrost or Gungnir? I'm hesitant to stray from the R2R\ladder\Multibit family of DACs but it sounds like the FPGA technology in the Chord makes it quite different than other delta sigma DACs.


Like what my previous post said, I really couldn’t hear much of a difference between Qutest and Metrum Onyx, which is supposedly a step up from Qutest, in my speaker system. Maybe I shouldn’t do quick A/B but that’s how I and another person demoing heard. I might need to test them on my headphone system though, but I really don’t find Qutest to be noticeably brighter than the NOS dac


----------



## Hooster

Triode User said:


> I never find that method of A/B comparison much use apart from when there are glaring differences (The Holo May for instance only took 10 minutes to realise how much better the Qutest is!). I much prefer to listen just to one dac for say a couple of days and then change and do the same with the other.



I think you are 100% right to do this. Fast A/B testing does not replicate real listening. If I want to compare component A and to component B I find the best way is simply to use component A for a few weeks and then replace it with component B and just listen normally. Differences, if there are any will reveal themselves.


----------



## Semper HiFi

IZONE said:


> I own a Bifrost 2 and Qutest together. Qutest sounds like a delta sigma dac with more rounded edges in the transients, also better transient timing, removing the harshness of traditional Delta Sigma / general haziness + it digs out more details + clarity (traditional strengths of D/S). It doesn't sound like an R2R or D/S but somewhere in between with the benefits of both, but if I had to say it does sound closer to Delta Sigma (which it is). Bifrost 2 sounds thick / musical / analog but a bit veiled compared to the Qutest, still nice level of details/clarity of course. Also In My Humble Experience the Qutest really benefits from burn-in and upgrading the power adapter / power supply / USB cable. I also use a small USB dongle to mitigate jitter/noise. Before these small adjustment the Qutest sounded even more D/S but it is now closer to R2R sounding than before to my ears and a beautiful thing of art. I wish Schiit would license their Unison USB tech to Chord. That mating would sound amazing.


Thanks, that's exactly what I wanted to hear. I'm hoping to get rid of some of the veiling that you describe without loosing too much of the warmth or richness that the Bifrost has.


----------



## x RELIC x

Semper HiFi said:


> Has anyone upgraded to the Qutest from a Multibit DAC such as the Bifrost or Gungnir? I'm hesitant to stray from the R2R\ladder\Multibit family of DACs but it sounds like the FPGA technology in the Chord makes it quite different than other delta sigma DACs.


Don’t forget about the actual Pulse Array DAC Rob invented. The FPGA is half the equation, handling the digital filter. The DAC is the Pulse Array.


----------



## Blackbriar0216

Has anyone used usb C hub or USB a to c OTG interconnect to their Chord qutest ? Does any of these components compromise sound quality ?


----------



## Womaz

The Qutest has really surprised me. I am in the process of building a separates set up for my 1266TC

I have ordered the Niimbus US5 Pro and it will arrive soon I hope. Currently I have the Burson Conductor 3X Reference which will be traded in or sold. So I had to find a DAC to use.

I got the Qutest on trial from a dealer and as the Niimbus is taking a while to get hold of I tried the Qutest with the Burson. I was not expecting much of a change as the Burson sounded very good to me anyway , but the Qutest is a big improvement on the DAC in the Burson. I was not expecting this level of improvement at this price point.

It has convinced me that separates are the way to go. The bass is tighter and less bloated and overpowering. It is a much cleaner sounds and this lets me hear all of the different instruments a lot more clearly.

I was also considering other DACs with the Niimbus , the Pontus 2, Sonnet Morpheus or maybe even a Holo Audio DAC….but after hearing the Qutest I am not sure I need to do this.

I am not sure what I would gain, so the Qutest may not be a temporary addition after all, it may stay in my set up.


----------



## MatW

Womaz said:


> The Qutest has really surprised me. I am in the process of building a separates set up for my 1266TC
> 
> I have ordered the Niimbus US5 Pro and it will arrive soon I hope. Currently I have the Burson Conductor 3X Reference which will be traded in or sold. So I had to find a DAC to use.
> 
> ...


I agree, the Qutest is an excellent DAC, very happy with it.


----------



## Womaz

So assuming the Qutest is purchased, is the M Scaler the next step up. Or is the TT2 a better option as a DAC?
So Qutest and Mscaler v  Hugo TT2. 
Not a lot of difference in cost but I am assuming the Qutest and MScaler would be the way to go


----------



## alekc

Womaz said:


> So assuming the Qutest is purchased, is the M Scaler the next step up. Or is the TT2 a better option as a DAC?
> So Qutest and Mscaler v  Hugo TT2.
> Not a lot of difference in cost but I am assuming the Qutest and MScaler would be the way to go


Depends how much you like Qutest sound signature. HTT2 has different tunning. While I have never heard mscaled Qutest considering what M Scaler gives to HTT2, adding M Scaler to Qutest will not bring you HTT2 level. So we are coming back to main question: do you like Qutest tunning. If yes, than adding M Scaler makes maybe some sense. If not, switching to HTT2 first makes more sense IMHO.


----------



## Womaz

alekc said:


> Depends how much you like Qutest sound signature. HTT2 has different tunning. While I have never heard mscaled Qutest considering what M Scaler gives to HTT2, adding M Scaler to Qutest will not bring you HTT2 level. So we are coming back to main question: do you like Qutest tunning. If yes, than adding M Scaler makes maybe some sense. If not, switching to HTT2 first makes more sense IMHO.


Well this is my first standalone DAC that I have tried so I do not have a lot of experience, but yes the Qutest has me very impressed indeed, compared to my current all in one Burson Conductor 3XReference.
I was not expecting the differences to be that great. So I have no idea what the Hugo TT brings to the table compared to the Qutest. As I have the Niimbus on the way I thought the Qutest-MScaler would make more sense as I do not need the HP Amp section of the TT2


----------



## The Jester

That’s why I chose the Qutest/MScaler route, already have pre/power speaker amps and a headphone amp I’m more than happy with as far as “tuning” goes, so all I wanted was a quality D/A system with simple single ended outputs to sit alongside my turntable and phono preamp, I can understand that TT2 and Dave are high end digital components but they are still missing at least one analogue Input to make them useful as a full featured preamp instead of a digital volume control … for the $$ I’m more than happy …..


----------



## schnesim

Womaz said:


> So assuming the Qutest is purchased, is the M Scaler the next step up. Or is the TT2 a better option as a DAC?
> So Qutest and Mscaler v  Hugo TT2.
> Not a lot of difference in cost but I am assuming the Qutest and MScaler would be the way to go


To see if the MScaler is worth it for you, I'd suggest upsampling a couple of tracks/albums yourself with sox or HQPlayer and see how much you like the improvement.

Here you can find a custom sox version (works only with macos or Linux) which supports up to 6mio tabs, if you're curious: https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/hqplayer-vs-sox.11286/page-2#post-366373


----------



## The Jester

Or maybe find a dealer that’ll let you listen to your Qutest with and without MScaler ?


----------



## Womaz

schnesim said:


> To see if the MScaler is worth it for you, I'd suggest upsampling a couple of tracks/albums yourself with sox or HQPlayer and see how much you like the improvement.
> 
> Here you can find a custom sox version (works only with macos or Linux) which supports up to 6mio tabs, if you're curious: https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/hqplayer-vs-sox.11286/page-2#post-366373


This is way above my technical abilities I am afraid.  Thanks for the post though.


----------



## Hello kitty

Hey everyone. Has anyone compared the Qutest to the DAC function of the iFi iDSD Micro Black Label? I am thinking of upgrading, but is the Qutest really worth the price difference? I have never owned a Chord product before.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

Womaz said:


> Well this is my first standalone DAC that I have tried so I do not have a lot of experience, but yes the Qutest has me very impressed indeed, compared to my current all in one Burson Conductor 3XReference.
> I was not expecting the differences to be that great. So I have no idea what the Hugo TT brings to the table compared to the Qutest. As I have the Niimbus on the way I thought the Qutest-MScaler would make more sense as I do not need the HP Amp section of the TT2



Back when I was in a quest to searching amp for abyss diana phi, I tried qutest with many type of desktop amps, and best result was formula s. However, none of that set up I tried being better than TT2 straight from headphone out. So I sell the qutest and move up to TT2. I feel like the higher end we move our chain, the most important the dac quality.


----------



## Rob Watts

schnesim said:


> To see if the MScaler is worth it for you, I'd suggest upsampling a couple of tracks/albums yourself with sox or HQPlayer and see how much you like the improvement.
> 
> Here you can find a custom sox version (works only with macos or Linux) which supports up to 6mio tabs, if you're curious: https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/hqplayer-vs-sox.11286/page-2#post-366373


Using software up-sampling like HQPlayer and PGGB will give you no idea at all of the performance of the M scaler. Millions, or billions of taps using the wrong algorithm simply gives you the wrong result. The WTA algorithm is the only one that is designed (from theory and optimised with thousands of listening tests) to reconstruct the timing of transients with the minimum error. And the SQ and musicality of a filter is all down to the successful reconstruction of the timing of transients.


----------



## AndrewOld

Rob Watts said:


> Using software up-sampling like HQPlayer and PGGB will give you no idea at all of the performance of the M scaler. Millions, or billions of taps using the wrong algorithm simply gives you the wrong result. The WTA algorithm is the only one that is designed (from theory and optimised with thousands of listening tests) to reconstruct the timing of transients with the minimum error. And the SQ and musicality of a filter is all down to the successful reconstruction of the timing of transients.


Why can’t the WTA algorithm be implemented such that it can run on a PC or Mac?


----------



## alekc

Hello kitty said:


> Hey everyone. Has anyone compared the Qutest to the DAC function of the iFi iDSD Micro Black Label? I am thinking of upgrading, but is the Qutest really worth the price difference? I have never owned a Chord product before.


@Hello kitty  Qutest needs amp and is desktop solution. Micro BL is a transportable dac/amp combo, quite powerful and musical. If you like ifi micro bl sound signature Qutest may not be your best bet but it may depend on amp pairing too. Haven't heard Chord Anni yet so can't help you there.

For me Qutest has been more sterile, dry and analytical than micro bl or ifi idac2+iCan SE and while I just love Mojo sound signature Hugo 2/Qutest signature is not what I've been looking for in music. Only TT2 have came close but obviously this is my private opinion and YMMV.


----------



## maxh22

Rob Watts said:


> Using software up-sampling like HQPlayer and PGGB will give you no idea at all of the performance of the M scaler. Millions, or billions of taps using the wrong algorithm simply gives you the wrong result. The WTA algorithm is the only one that is designed (from theory and optimised with thousands of listening tests) to reconstruct the timing of transients with the minimum error. And the SQ and musicality of a filter is all down to the successful reconstruction of the timing of transients.



Would it be possible to do a WTA version of PGGB? Pre-upsample tracks to millions or billions of taps but with the WTA algorithm? That would surely be interesting


----------



## elira

AndrewOld said:


> Why can’t the WTA algorithm be implemented such that it can run on a PC or Mac?


It can, but it would consume a lot of resources and have high latency.


----------



## AndrewOld

elira said:


> It can, but it would consume a lot of resources and have high latency.


People who have abandoned the MScaler and run PGGB and HQPlayer seem content with that. And an MScaler and recommended cables cost £5000 for which you can buy a serious amount of computing power.


----------



## uzi2

elira said:


> It can, but it would consume a lot of resources and have high latency.





AndrewOld said:


> Why can’t the WTA algorithm be implemented such that it can run on a PC or Mac?


Would you rather have your life's work safely embedded in a hardware solution or open to attack in a software package?


----------



## AndrewOld

uzi2 said:


> Would you rather have your life's work safely embedded in a hardware solution or open to attack in a software package?


Would you rather be locked in to a piece of hardware that can’t be updated or open to software that can be updated indefinitely and run on a variety of platforms?


----------



## bikutoru

AndrewOld said:


> Would you rather be locked in to a piece of hardware that can’t be updated or open to software that can be updated indefinitely and run on a variety of platforms?


when it is your life's work, you can do with it whatever you want, including keep it to yourself and not show to anybody


----------



## Rob Watts

An FPGA based up-sampler has innate advantages - lower RF noise than a PC (FPGA solutions are much more power efficient), direct control of the clocks and data outputs (again minimizing noise) and the freedom to choose the DSP design. 64 bit floating point is not accurate enough for transparency - it creates noise floor modulation innately. Designing your own DSP means that noise floor modulation can be eliminated.


----------



## alekc

uzi2 said:


> Would you rather have your life's work safely embedded in a hardware solution or open to attack in a software package?


Just a side note: since M Scaler is FPGA based device technically speaking it is embedded in software.


----------



## The Jester

Imagine on the release of the Dave Rob built in a facility to “update” his software, which was I’m guessing optimised for transparency within the constraints of available FPGA’s over many months (years ? ) what would be the use of such an option ?
Spend more time tweaking to make it a more pleasing sound for some critics while making it less transparent, or doing all the hard work of porting his own algorithms to various software platforms and then supporting the end users,
If that was started when the Dave was released we’d still be waiting for the MScaler ….


----------



## bikutoru

There is https://www.psaudio.com/products/directstream-dac/, it is FPGA based and updatable. Reports over the years were that with new firmware(s), almost every time it sounds like a brand new DAC. I'm not sure WTA based DACs owners want what they love and used to, to be replaced with some new sound. Of course it would be their choice and is the initial sentiment that it could. Then we'd have reports how the previous firmware was fantastic and a new one "doesn't do it for me" and a link to classifieds  :lol

These are just different philosophies, constraints and choices.


----------



## MarkusBarkus

...sometimes (almost always, actually) you learn things after the release of a software or hardware product. Users are doing things QA sweeps didn't envision. And goofs (my camp) take things apart, or develop ancillary devices, submerge it in banana cream...it's endless. 

Sometimes there's an incremental improvement you could push out, if the distributed products can communicate with mother. 

Sometimes there is a middle path, wherein you could "grab" an update online, and apply it via USB, for example.

Absent options above, the new knowledge may get applied to a new product. Sometimes people prefer the old product. That's the game. 

Some folks treat Dave like a museum piece, never to be touched or improved upon, just to be admired. Ah, the Mona Lisa's smile.

I admire the Dave. I still own one. And an MScaler. I had a Qutest too. All fab stuff. But perfect? I don't think so. But excellent? Oh yes! 

My point (if I have one): treat the Dave like the excellent product it is, instead of a holy relic. It's as perfect as it needed to be...


----------



## Hello kitty (Dec 9, 2021)

Wow so I just received my new Chord Qutest and right out of the box the Filter button keeps getting stuck! This is what almost $2000 buys nowadays!?!? What a joke. Unit sound great but having a button get stuck over and over again is unacceptable at this price range. I am pissed.


----------



## Womaz

As I have posted above I am impressed with the Qutest. However I do not like the aesthetics of it. I am trying to overcome this as it does sound great
Has anyone any ideas how I can raise the Qutest off the ground , so I cant see the wires behind the back of it. I really dislike seeing a lot of wires and cables and the Qutest is that small that I can see them . My OCDs kick in 
So are there any reasonable platforms or bases out there that will raise this off the ground and at a reasonable cost? I know there is the Qutest stand but again I am not keen on this.


----------



## MatW

Womaz said:


> As I have posted above I am impressed with the Qutest. However I do not like the aesthetics of it. I am trying to overcome this as it does sound great
> Has anyone any ideas how I can raise the Qutest off the ground , so I cant see the wires behind the back of it. I really dislike seeing a lot of wires and cables and the Qutest is that small that I can see them . My OCDs kick in
> So are there any reasonable platforms or bases out there that will raise this off the ground and at a reasonable cost? I know there is the Qutest stand but again I am not keen on this.


Just put it on top of a stack of other gear ...


----------



## Womaz

MatW said:


> Just put it on top of a stack of other gear ...


That is some stack 
I tend not to stack as I dont like it.


----------



## JelStIy

Hello kitty said:


> Wow so I just received my new Chord Qutest and right out of the box the Filter button keeps getting stuck! This is what almost $2000 buys nowadays!?!? What a joke. Unit sound great but having a button get stuck over and over again is unacceptable at this price range. I am pissed.



This happened to me too. I flipped it over to find the serial number and it got unstuck. Afterwards it got stuck a few times and flipping it (gently) solved the problem. This was in the few first days of ownership. Since then I haven’t had any problems (it’s been a few months now). 

When it first happened I contacted customer support by email and they just never responded. 

All in all, probably my first and last Chord product, although it sounds good.


----------



## miketlse

Womaz said:


> As I have posted above I am impressed with the Qutest. However I do not like the aesthetics of it. I am trying to overcome this as it does sound great
> Has anyone any ideas how I can raise the Qutest off the ground , so I cant see the wires behind the back of it. I really dislike seeing a lot of wires and cables and the Qutest is that small that I can see them . My OCDs kick in
> So are there any reasonable platforms or bases out there that will raise this off the ground and at a reasonable cost? I know there is the Qutest stand but again I am not keen on this.


Don't forget sites like Pinterest, because I find it interesting to see the creative ideas that others come up with for headphone stands, equipment stands, etc.
Ok their designs may require some DIY, but their 'creative seed corn' can be an inspiring starting point.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

MatW said:


> Just put it on top of a stack of other gear ...


Impressive photo here, love the aesthetic! (Wonderful gears for sure!)


----------



## David222

I'll apologize in advance for the dumb (Qutest) newbie question...

Since there is no power on/off --> Is the best practice to unplug before connecting interconnects into headphone AMP ? 

Is there enough voltage coming out of the Qutest --> AMP that it should not be connected while "power on" ?   Can that cause damage or is voltage too low to matter? 

Just realized my other DACs are normally "off" when swapping interconnects, etc. 

Appreciate any guidance


----------



## mauaudiocr

David222 said:


> I'll apologize in advance for the dumb (Qutest) newbie question...
> 
> Since there is no power on/off --> Is the best practice to unplug before connecting interconnects into headphone AMP ?
> 
> ...


The Youtuber Passion for Sound on his review for the Qutest recommends to first do the connections to the amp and then power on the Qutest.


----------



## Womaz

Ok so just got the Qutest and I am using it with the Niimbus US5 Pro. I just used the 3w setting as that is the setting it was at.
What difference will the other setting at 1w and 2w make? Do you think I am using the best setting for my amp?


----------



## elira

Womaz said:


> Ok so just got the Qutest and I am using it with the Niimbus US5 Pro. I just used the 3w setting as that is the setting it was at.
> What difference will the other setting at 1w and 2w make? Do you think I am using the best setting for my amp?


Worse case you overload the input stage, but it should be relatively obvious when that happens as it usually clips and sounds awful . The 2 and 1 volt settings are for amps with an input stage that cannot handle the 3V or if you want to attenuate the signal. In theory the 3V output gives you the best performance.


----------



## mauaudiocr (Dec 11, 2021)

elira said:


> Worse case you overload the input stage, but it should be relatively obvious when that happens as it usually clips and sounds awful . The 2 and 1 volt settings are for amps with an input stage that cannot handle the 3V or if you want to attenuate the signal. In theory the 3V output gives you the best performance.


It depends of the headphones that you use, if you have sensitive headphones and you don't have much volume range (gets loud very quickly) then change the output setting so you get more range for the volume, for hard to drive headphones you want to use the 3v output, but as elira mentioned above sometimes some amps might not be able to handle the 3v input properly, is trial an error, try different outputs settings and see which one sounds best to your ears and your cans.


----------



## lightoflight (Dec 12, 2021)

I'm having good results with the Qutest connected to the Iris and Brickwall. It sounds noticeably clearer now. Testing was done with the Flux FA-12 amp. I wasn't expecting it to be this good. When it was connected by USB there is a slight graininess and it sounded like there's a blanket over the speakers so to speak, I'm using headphones.

I'm using the BNC connecters and 75 Ω adapters are hard to find. The ones I got on Amazon have a loose connection. I have ordered some better ones made in Germany and hopefully they will be a snugger fit but they won't be delivered till next month.


----------



## tomita

AndrewOld said:


> Why can’t the WTA algorithm be implemented such that it can run on a PC or Mac?


Cause they couldn't charge 4.000 € for that software.


----------



## bluenight

Any news when the next gen chord dacs will be released?


----------



## TheMiddleSky

bluenight said:


> Any news when the next gen chord dacs will be released?



In theory it should be Mojo 2 (January), and then only god knows when Dave 2 come to market. No Hugo 3 or TT3 before Dave 2 released.


----------



## tomita

Rob Watts said:


> Using software up-sampling like HQPlayer and PGGB will give you no idea at all of the performance of the M scaler. Millions, or billions of taps using the wrong algorithm simply gives you the wrong result. The WTA algorithm is the only one that is designed (from theory and optimised with thousands of listening tests) to reconstruct the timing of transients with the minimum error. And the SQ and musicality of a filter is all down to the successful reconstruction of the timing of transients.


Have you tested/measured HQPlayer's filters and concluded that they are all based on wrong algorithms?


----------



## Womaz

tomita said:


> Have you tested/measured HQPlayer's filters and concluded that they are all based on wrong algorithms?


I think he probably has a lot better things to do with his time......like having a massive input to quality Hifi products


----------



## tomita

Womaz said:


> I think he probably has a lot better things to do with his time......like having a massive input to quality Hifi products


Fair point, but, in that case, he should not talk about things he hasn't tested, let alone call them "wrong".


----------



## miketlse (Dec 27, 2021)

tomita said:


> Fair point, but, in that case, he should not talk about things he hasn't tested, let alone call them "wrong".


Read the many posts that he has made explaining elements of the mathematics of the algorithms. Also the explanations about the disadvantages of using PCs for upscaling, when you can be at the mercy of operating system, plus the CPU settings, as to whether all the streams of digital data are kept in sync, or some are buffered for a while causing the data to be out of sync. Once that happens, then you cannot accurately reconstruct the start of music transients. He has had 30 years experience of studying/analysing the various types of algorithms that DAC designers use, so when other developers of DAC software describe their work, he has a good idea about how close they are getting to the Shannon mathematical theory of DACs. If the maths used is wrong, then the audio output will have errors - you don't need to physically test the DAC to know/prove that.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-qutest-dac-official-thread.869417/post-16696978


----------



## tomita

miketlse said:


> Read the many posts that he has made explaining elements of the mathematics of the algorithms. Also the explanations about the disadvantages of using PCs for upscaling, when you can be at the mercy of operating system, plus the CPU settings, as to whether all the streams of digital data are kept in sync, or some are buffered for a while causing the data to be out of sync. Once that happens, then you cannot accurately reconstruct the start of music transients. He has had 30 years experience of studying/analysing the various types of algorithms that DAC designers use, so when other developers of DAC software describe their work, he has a good idea about how close they are getting to the Shannon mathematical theory of DACs. If the maths used is wrong, then the audio output will have errors - you don't need to physically test the DAC to know/prove that.


I'm not questioning Mr. Watt's competence—that's not the topic here. I'm only asking if he's certain that all of the HQPlayer's filters / noise shapers are "wrong". That would mean there's proof to that, right? Otherwise, it wouldn't be fair to be so blunt regarding a competitor's solution. Your other arguments are irrelevant. I'm not discussing which solution is better. I'm only intreged about him calling these alternatives "wrong".


----------



## miketlse

tomita said:


> I'm not questioning Mr. Watt's competence—that's not the topic here. I'm only asking if he's certain that all of the HQPlayer's filters / noise shapers are "wrong". That would mean there's proof to that, right? Otherwise, it wouldn't be fair to be so blunt regarding a competitor's solution. Your other arguments are irrelevant. I'm not discussing which solution is better. I'm only intreged about him calling these alternatives "wrong".


So you regard how the algorithms are implemented in the flow of data inside a PC as irrelevant.
You clearly don't understand that there are *two* key contributors involved:

Using the correct algorithms
How those algorithms are implemented in the PC - a poor implementation inevitably leads to mathematical errors.
You can't ignore either of them.


----------



## ardbeg1975

tomita said:


> Have you tested/measured HQPlayer's filters and concluded that they are all based on wrong algorithms?


I concur with this sentiment. I’m no math major but if the ultimate goal of any these upsampling approaches (hardware or software-based) is to reconstitute transient information, HQPlayer seems to be doing fairly well using similar (but not exactly the same) algorithmic implementations (e.g. million tap sinc functions). Don’t get me wrong - if Chord gets access to newer silicon and ups the taps on a Hugo TT2-sized Mscaler implementation AND shrinks the existing 1 million tap implementation into a Qutest-sized (and priced) chassis, I’m all in for the latter. Until then, the value to cost ratio of a $5K hardware implementation versus a similar but admittedly not exactly the same $300 software implementation is not persuasive.


----------



## tomita (Dec 22, 2021)

miketlse said:


> So you regard how the algorithms are implemented in the flow of data inside a PC as irrelevant.


No, you misunderstood me. I didn't say that the implementation is irrelevant. My only concern is Mr. Watt's comment and that comment regarded only the algorithm in itself and not the implementation. That's why I said that you're taking the discussion to a place that is beyond the topic. Mr. Watt said that HQPlayer's algorithm is wrong. I want to know how did he come to this conclusion. That's all. I'm not here to discuss which approach is better in terms of implementation.


----------



## miketlse

tomita said:


> No, you misunderstood me. I didn't say that the implementation is irrelevant. My only concern is Mr. Watt's comment and that comment regarded only the algorithm in itself and not the implementation. That's why I said that you're taking the discussion to a place that is beyond the topic. Mr. Watt said that HQPlayer's algorithm is wrong. I want to know how did he come to this conclusion. That's all. I'm not here to discuss which approach is better in terms of implementation.


Rob has posted many times explaining the pros/cons of various algorithms and implementations. Search for his posts, and they will help you understand better where he is coming from, when he makes his comments.


----------



## AndrewOld

miketlse said:


> Rob has posted many times explaining the pros/cons of various algorithms and implementations. Search for his posts, and they will help you understand better where he is coming from, when he makes his comments.


The issue is not the algorithms,  but the platform on which they are implemented. You cannot seriously defend the FPGA platform that Rob and  Chord use when it needs £1500 of cables to ameliorate its deficiencies.


----------



## Rob Watts

miketlse said:


> Rob has posted many times explaining the pros/cons of various algorithms and implementations. Search for his posts, and they will help you understand better where he is coming from, when he makes his comments.


Possibly my best post is this one.

As to whether my WTA is better than other algorithms I leave to others to decide, and of course there is no accounting for taste. But I will say that in my opinion the only subjectively important function of an interpolation filter is to reconstruct the timing of transients accurately; this is absolutely vital and accounts for all of the sound quality and musicality of a properly designed interpolation filter. No other designer recognises the importance of transient reconstruction at all in that nobody talks about it - I have been a sole voice on this issue for the past 23 years. 

Transient timing reconstruction is a huge (and in reality extremely complex) problem with interpolation filters - and if all other designers do not even accept that this issue is a problem, what are the chances of an optimum solution? Secondly, thousands of listening tests went into fine tuning the WTA algorithm - I am not aware of any other design process for algorithms being so intense.


----------



## miketlse

Rob Watts said:


> Possibly my best post is this one.
> 
> As to whether my WTA is better than other algorithms I leave to others to decide, and of course there is no accounting for taste. But I will say that in my opinion the only subjectively important function of an interpolation filter is to reconstruct the timing of transients accurately; this is absolutely vital and accounts for all of the sound quality and musicality of a properly designed interpolation filter. No other designer recognises the importance of transient reconstruction at all in that nobody talks about it - I have been a sole voice on this issue for the past 23 years.
> 
> Transient timing reconstruction is a huge (and in reality extremely complex) problem with interpolation filters - and if all other designers do not even accept that this issue is a problem, what are the chances of an optimum solution? Secondly, thousands of listening tests went into fine tuning the WTA algorithm - I am not aware of any other design process for algorithms being so intense.


Thanks Rob.


----------



## David222

Just starting to lean into new Qutest...

1.  Even with my least resolving headphones (Modhouse Argons) details are impressive...clear/clean.  

2. Great fun/synergy pairing with both WooAudio (WA6 not in photo) and Burson 3XP. 

3. Output voltage remains at default (2V). Will probably test  3V at some point to see what impact/benefits. 

4. While all-around Qutest performance is awesome...drums...drums...drums.... love the way hi-hats sound/feel.

5. Running stock power to get a sense for baseline -- will likely upgrade at some point in 22'. 

Look forward to tinkering with the filters in the weeks ahead.


----------



## Ike1985

dmance said:


> I plan to continue to use my USB chain of MP-U1 battery, intona and 15 ferrites with Qutest. I don't think you can ever have enough protection from RFI/EMI.



What is an intona and MP-u1?


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 4, 2022)

Rob Watts said:


> Possibly my best post is this one.
> 
> As to whether my WTA is better than other algorithms I leave to others to decide, and of course there is no accounting for taste. But I will say that in my opinion the only subjectively important function of an interpolation filter is to reconstruct the timing of transients accurately; this is absolutely vital and accounts for all of the sound quality and musicality of a properly designed interpolation filter. No other designer recognises the importance of transient reconstruction at all in that nobody talks about it - I have been a sole voice on this issue for the past 23 years.
> 
> Transient timing reconstruction is a huge (and in reality extremely complex) problem with interpolation filters - and if all other designers do not even accept that this issue is a problem, what are the chances of an optimum solution? Secondly, thousands of listening tests went into fine tuning the WTA algorithm - I am not aware of any other design process for algorithms being so intense.



Although i (and most others) can't fully understand the math and formula that creates the WTA, i do understand that its purpose is making a higher sampled digital of a real analogue captured audio signal out of a less sampled version of the same analog. With going from 44.1 redbook showing the biggest step up and therefore most advantage.

The MS took it as far as equal to 768k which, to test the WTA's accuracy,  you want to compare with digital recorded by Davina doing 768k ADC of a real captured analog.

With the knowledge u gathered sofar.. what will we look at in the future in terms of sampling rate needed until the benefits of higher sampling diminish. Say reaching the human ear's timing resolution limit?

Sadly our current Chord DAC's won't be able of decoding more than 768k once the next generation xMS comes out..


----------



## Rob Watts

An awful lot has been learnt over the past couple of years - with some extraordinary findings, of which I will be able to talk about (hopefully) later in the year. But one thing I have definitely confirmed is that as you go higher in sample rate the benefits from increased tap length diminish markedly; 768 kHz does seem to be the sweet spot for recordings, so future more advanced and costly M scalers will still be at 705/768.


----------



## Christer

Ike1985 said:


> What is an intona and MP-u1?


Hi, not sure about the Intona, galvanic isolation I guess?But the MP-u1 is a battery powered psu that works quite well with Qutest and at least in my system delivers a slightly smoother, fuller and warmer SQ than the stock wallwart. But it is a bit inconvenient to use since it only runs for  about 2-3 hours before a recharge is needed. And it take  about three hours to  fully charge again.
MP stands for Musical Paradise and it was a product sold in Asia where I bought mine together with my Qutest.
With Qutest alone at first before mscaler and Wave Storm BNCs  I felt it essential to use all the time.
Cheers


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 5, 2022)

Rob Watts said:


> An awful lot has been learnt over the past couple of years - with some extraordinary findings, of which I will be able to talk about (hopefully) later in the year. But one thing I have definitely confirmed is that as you go higher in sample rate the benefits from increased tap length diminish markedly; 768 kHz does seem to be the sweet spot for recordings, so future more advanced and costly M scalers will still be at 705/768.



🤔 hm i always thought doubling the taplength from a certain quantity means doubling the samplerate as seen on current MS.

One needs more samples to come closer to the actual transients, where infinite samples is best (thats analog)

Or is there a specific reason you chose 384k as a output for 0,5M taps and 192k for 250k taps?

So can we say 1M tabs might not be enough for predicting and recreating all 768k samples totally accurate? And we might need more to fully utilize 768k?
Ofcourse Davina will prove this..

Actually i can't imagine there arent any 768k ADC's already being used for studio recording to test this theory.


----------



## Jon L

Apparently, the $15K DCS Bartok DAC sounds "just like Qutest with slightly better soundstage."  Oh, well...


----------



## elira

Jon L said:


> Apparently, the $15K DCS Bartok DAC sounds "just like Qutest with slightly better soundstage."  Oh, well...



The qutest is an amazing DAC.


----------



## Rob Watts

Reactcore said:


> 🤔 hm i always thought doubling the taplength from a certain quantity means doubling the samplerate as seen on current MS.
> 
> One needs more samples to come closer to the actual transients, where infinite samples is best (thats analog)
> 
> ...


The comment about doubling the tap length with sample rate is correct about the M scaler, but it's not a universal principal. With the M scaler it's always one filter doing one job - 1M taps at 705/768k. So for 352/384 only half of the samples that are created by the filter are being used - the rest discarded, so the number of taps actually used is halved. If one was to design a 352/384 only filter then it could be 1M taps (although memory requirements would be larger). 

Alas analogue also suffers from timing errors too; the 50kHz bias (sometimes higher frequency on modified reel to reel) use on tape effectively modulates the timing of transients. I have often thought that the soft sound from tape is also down to this bias - it's not just the distortion from tape. But even a simple amplifier will degrade transient timing, particularly if it has HF distortion. This problem is huge for digital, but regular analogue is not immune from it.

There are 768k pro ADCs available today, and I have heard some test recordings.


----------



## Christer

Jon L said:


> Apparently, the $15K DCS Bartok DAC sounds "just like Qutest with slightly better soundstage."  Oh, well...



Hmm, I have never auditioned the Bartok, but if the music samples he used around the 8 minute mark where it started when I logged in to the YT review ,is the type of music he generally uses to judge SQ with, his take on SQ is completely irrelevant to me.
I do not waste my time with reviewers whose music choices are largely irrelevant in a HIFI context.
 Electronic synthetic  pop rock noise tells VERY little if anything  about what a dac or any other HIFI product sounds like with well recorded  acoustic music .
I stopped watching after those two examples.
But nevertheless, quite  interesting to note  that he apparently  rates it as basically the same as Qutest at a tenth of the price of a Bartok.
I chose Qutest over both TT2 and Dave for its reasonbly good value for money in this crazily overpriced digital world, when used with an Mscaler.
The Mscaler raises the total prize considerably.
 But it is imho an essential thing to add.
Cheers CC


----------



## Reactcore

Rob Watts said:


> The comment about doubling the tap length with sample rate is correct about the M scaler, but it's not a universal principal. With the M scaler it's always one filter doing one job - 1M taps at 705/768k. So for 352/384 only half of the samples that are created by the filter are being used - the rest discarded, so the number of taps actually used is halved. If one was to design a 352/384 only filter then it could be 1M taps (although memory requirements would be larger).
> 
> Alas analogue also suffers from timing errors too; the 50kHz bias (sometimes higher frequency on modified reel to reel) use on tape effectively modulates the timing of transients. I have often thought that the soft sound from tape is also down to this bias - it's not just the distortion from tape. But even a simple amplifier will degrade transient timing, particularly if it has HF distortion. This problem is huge for digital, but regular analogue is not immune from it.
> 
> There are 768k pro ADCs available today, and I have heard some test recordings.



Ah so thats why 250k on 192 has the same delay as 1M while on white.
I found this while switching DBNC-Qutest vs optical on my amp.

What was your impression of those 768 ADC's?

Will Davina make use of a pulse array for taking samples to eliminate jitter?


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Christer said:


> Electronic synthetic pop rock noise tells VERY little if anything about what a dac or any other HIFI product sounds like with well recorded acoustic music .


+1

I like to watch @GoldenOne channel. Videos are very informative and well made. At the same time, when it comes to sound and sound quality, I often have a completely opposite opinion.


----------



## Arniesb

Ragnar-BY said:


> +1
> 
> I like to watch @GoldenOne channel. Videos are very informative and well made. At the same time, when it comes to sound and sound quality, I often have a completely opposite opinion.


He strikes me as the guy who have must have different opinion about every topic even though he is factually not right...


----------



## Christer

Ragnar-BY said:


> +1
> 
> I like to watch @GoldenOne channel. Videos are very informative and well made. At the same time, when it comes to sound and sound quality, I often have a completely opposite opinion.


Oh, I did not even notice who the reviewer was I just  logged out again  after those  irrelevant musical samples used.
Cheers CC


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 6, 2022)

Christer said:


> Oh, I did not even notice who the reviewer was I just  logged out again  after those  irrelevant musical samples used.
> Cheers CC



My theory about electronicly computed music is that the used synthesizers place all the transients exactly on the samples on which it is artificially created.

Since the WTA filter is there to recover transients between samples it won't change anything on computed music like it does on mic recorded.
Hence why i hear no difference.
Even with MS added.

I do think that the pulse array technology with its low noisefloor brings benefits with this music type too.


----------



## Rob Watts

Reactcore said:


> Ah so thats why 250k on 192 has the same delay as 1M while on white.
> I found this while switching DBNC-Qutest vs optical on my amp.
> 
> What was your impression of those 768 ADC's?
> ...


The 768k recordings sounded reminiscent of an M scaler - extended bass with precision and a cavernous soundstage, with good instrument separation and focus. But it was by no means perfect though.

Sure the ADC will be pulse array based, just like the DACs. Indeed, mathematically an ADC is the same as a DAC but with analogue integrators and quantizers - a DAC has digital integrators and quantizers. The tricky bits are maintaining stability with analogue integrators, and the decimation path, as aliasing makes huge differences to the performance.


----------



## The Jester

With Chord’s amplifier presence in some well renowned studios Is there any interest in the Davina project from anyone in the recording industry yet ?


----------



## Rob Watts

Yes I get nagged a lot from pro people - why is it taking so long! I am starting to sound like George RR Martin on when Song of Ice and Fire series (Game of Thrones) will get finished...


----------



## The Jester

Lol,
Good to know we may all hear some Davina ADC goodness ..👍


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 7, 2022)

Rob Watts said:


> The 768k recordings sounded reminiscent of an M scaler - extended bass with precision and a cavernous soundstage, with good instrument separation and focus. But it was by no means perfect though.
> 
> Sure the ADC will be pulse array based, just like the DACs. Indeed, mathematically an ADC is the same as a DAC but with analogue integrators and quantizers - a DAC has digital integrators and quantizers. The tricky bits are maintaining stability with analogue integrators, and the decimation path, as aliasing makes huge differences to the performance.



I guess a ADC will work best battery operated without switching based step up/down transforming to have the cleanest reference voltages.

Different topic
I have pointed this before but you have'nt replied to it.. but whats your take on HRTF research?

I read you talking of how amazing you can hear for example a dog barking 500m away or the brain being capable of discerning the direction a sound comes from.

It does'nt seem to stop by creating the perfect timing of transients and best small signal accuracy, but also how ones own ear gets the reflected waves of a sound from the torso, ear shelf and canal.
The brain processes those tiny delays to interprete depth and direction too.

A stereo amplified system can't fully recreate this unless these personal reflections are taken into account..

I have read about the realizer from Smyth and although i haven heard it.. i found their explanation and approach interesting.


----------



## Rob Watts

HRTF does work quite well - but - it needs accurate modelling of your own HRTF, and it needs really good DSP. 64 bit floating point is not up to the task unfortunately - getting DSP to be fully transparent requires much better accuracy than this. More about this issue later this year...

It only sorts out direction, not depth though. Perception of depth is another major issue, which HRTF will only degrade due to inadequate DSP.


----------



## Reactcore (Jan 7, 2022)

Rob Watts said:


> HRTF does work quite well - but - it needs accurate modelling of your own HRTF, and it needs really good DSP. 64 bit floating point is not up to the task unfortunately - getting DSP to be fully transparent requires much better accuracy than this. More about this issue later this year...
> 
> It only sorts out direction, not depth though. Perception of depth is another major issue, which HRTF will only degrade due to inadequate DSP.



I've seen software engineers creating ways to 'scan' ones ear with a mobile and app to use this model to calculate a persons HRTF as a file to use in a DSP.. interesting times are ahead.

Hm what else could change soundwaves to give them 'travelled distance' ?🤔😄 oh well..

Anyway thankyou for taking the time for answering. I'm for sure staying tuned 🛰


----------



## miketlse

Reactcore said:


> Hm what else could change soundwaves to give them 'travelled distance' ?🤔😄 oh well..


Air temperature, because it changes the air density, and the speed of sound?
Could impact things if headphones make one ear hotter.
Also if you are listening to speakers in your home, and one side of the room is hotter than the other.


----------



## The Jester

Atmospheric absorption increases with frequency, given that the different hairs in different parts of the Cochlea respond to different frequencies and the actual sound is compiled by the brain from those various signals, talking really small level differences like Db/100metre might go some way to explaining Rob’s experience with vanishingly low levels of small signal accuracy making such a difference to depth perception ?


----------



## Victorr

What will it be? Chord Qutest 2???
https://chordelectronics.co.uk/coming-soon


----------



## RobertSM

Victorr said:


> What will it be? Chord Qutest 2???
> https://chordelectronics.co.uk/coming-soon



Now this is exciting!

Good eye @Victorr


----------



## ardbeg1975

RobertSM said:


> Now this is exciting!
> 
> Good eye @Victorr


I’m hoping for Qutest chassis sized “baby” mscaler.


----------



## alxw0w

ardbeg1975 said:


> I’m hoping for Qutest chassis sized “baby” mscaler.


Could be. But its probably "just" Mojo 2


----------



## elira

alxw0w said:


> Could be. But its probably "just" Mojo 2


That would be a weird shape for a Mojo.


----------



## JaquesGelee (Jan 20, 2022)

elira said:


> That would be a weird shape for a Mojo.


We'll see. But have a look to the round rubber feets on the bottom. Those are only mostly at (semi) portable devices so far. Maybe a refreshed edged design.


----------



## thePhones

alxw0w said:


> Could be. But its probably "just" Mojo 2


You could be right, the cutout on the very bottom looks like a micro USB. But I hope it will be the new Mscaler for Dave with MASSIVE buttons😃


----------



## The Jester

RobertSM said:


> Now this is exciting!
> 
> Good eye @Victorr


I’d like to see that too …. Two standard Qutest buttons plus two large DX ones ?


----------



## WaveTheory

I just posted a review of the Qutest on my YT channel:



Enjoy!


----------



## Fugue

JoinDivision said:


> Are you using a modern ultrabook by any chance? Myself and Atriya both were and think they are the source of the issue.


No, an HP Omen.


----------



## ThomasHK

Questions for the Qutest users. I'm a huge H2 fan, but unfortunately the TT2 is our of my price range.

Are people running these with good amps while listening on IEMs. I would be very interested to hear about the best stacks people have landed on for this use case (IEM use focused).
Cheers!


----------



## TheMiddleSky

ThomasHK said:


> Questions for the Qutest users. I'm a huge H2 fan, but unfortunately the TT2 is our of my price range.
> 
> Are people running these with good amps while listening on IEMs. I would be very interested to hear about the best stacks people have landed on for this use case (IEM use focused).
> Cheers!



Singxer would synergize with iem well because of how low the SNR. So far no IEM I ever tried to have hissing problem from it. Not to mention it has exponential volume control (non linear), to make sure we have enough room to move potentiometer with sensitive iem.


----------



## schnesim

ThomasHK said:


> Questions for the Qutest users. I'm a huge H2 fan, but unfortunately the TT2 is our of my price range.
> 
> Are people running these with good amps while listening on IEMs. I would be very interested to hear about the best stacks people have landed on for this use case (IEM use focused).
> Cheers!


I use a Violectric V200 and IEMs. I was shocked at how much harder the bass of this amp hits compared to say a Dragonfly Red despite IEMs being really easy to drive. Also having the option to set the gain on the amp to -12 or -18 gives more than enough room on the volume dial.


----------



## Reactcore

Victorr said:


> What will it be? Chord Qutest 2???
> https://chordelectronics.co.uk/coming-soon



Yeap must be Mojo2
Mojo was discontinued and needs a follow up

I hope this time with selectable filter.. the lack of this is why i sold mine and went for Qutest


----------



## Reactcore

Add 8 legs and you have a S...



I wonder if it takes DBNC in its Spdif jack for a HMS


----------



## fetoll123

Rob Watts said:


> HRTF does work quite well - but - it needs accurate modelling of your own HRTF, and it needs really good DSP. 64 bit floating point is not up to the task unfortunately - getting DSP to be fully transparent requires much better accuracy than this. More about this issue later this year...
> 
> It only sorts out direction, not depth though. Perception of depth is another major issue, which HRTF will only degrade due to inadequate DSP.C


Can you answer something Rob Watts. Im using the Qutest with a MacBook Air, through a generic USB-B Cable. It then goes to a Schiit IEMagni. Why in gods name does it crackle like crazy when I play from my computer? Ive tried changing the output stages (I think) and nothing seem to work... I need help


----------



## kumar402

fetoll123 said:


> Can you answer something Rob Watts. Im using the Qutest with a MacBook Air, through a generic USB-B Cable. It then goes to a Schiit IEMagni. Why in gods name does it crackle like crazy when I play from my computer? Ive tried changing the output stages (I think) and nothing seem to work... I need help


Try different laptop or player with exclusive access to USB. The crackle is mostly due to error in transfer of data packets via USB.


----------



## fetoll123

kumar402 said:


> Try different laptop or player with exclusive access to USB. The crackle is mostly due to error in transfer of data packets via USB.


Yes tried it on my PC and it played without faults.. Now how to solve it...


----------



## kumar402

fetoll123 said:


> Yes tried it on my PC and it played without faults.. Now how to solve it...


Which player are you using to play music in Air ? Some players like Audirvana etc take exclusive access and help in avoiding such data loss. are you using any USB hub etc?


----------



## fetoll123

kumar402 said:


> Which player are you using to play music in Air ? Some players like Audirvana etc take exclusive access and help in avoiding such data loss


Im just using Spotify but the problem occurs on Youtube and basically all noise from the computer.


----------



## kumar402

fetoll123 said:


> Im just using Spotify but the problem occurs on Youtube and basically all noise from the computer.


Sorry forgot to ask do you connect via USB hub or directly to your laptop?


----------



## fetoll123

kumar402 said:


> Sorry forgot to ask do you connect via USB hub or directly to your laptop?


Through a "Hub". Apples official USB-c to USB adapter. This one : https://www.apple.com/se/shop/product/MJ1M2ZM/A/usb-c-till-usb-adapter


----------



## ardbeg1975 (Jan 30, 2022)

fetoll123 said:


> Through a "Hub". Apples official USB-c to USB adapter. This one : https://www.apple.com/se/shop/product/MJ1M2ZM/A/usb-c-till-usb-adapter


I experienced crackle from Apple M1 laptop to Qutest (via Roon) but only at higher bit rates (above 24/192). In my case it was resolved by using a Ethernet streamer (using the same USB cable from streamer as when direct from the Mac) between the Mac and the Qutest. So I know it wasn’t the USb cable itself.


----------



## fetoll123

ardbeg1975 said:


> I experienced crackle from Apple M1 laptop to Qutest (via Roon) but only at higher bit rates (above 24/192). In my case it was resolved by using a streamer using the same USB cable as direct from the Mac. So I know it wasn’t the cable.


Well I would want to be able to use all the streaming services if I could =) Im looking into it. As is said, works awesome on pc and also using optical.


----------



## Christer (Jan 30, 2022)

fetoll123 said:


> Can you answer something Rob Watts. Im using the Qutest with a MacBook Air, through a generic USB-B Cable. It then goes to a Schiit IEMagni. Why in gods name does it crackle like crazy when I play from my computer? Ive tried changing the output stages (I think) and nothing seem to work... I need help


Hmm, which M Air model are you using?
And what are its specs?
I am possibly thinking of geting an M1 Air without a fan as  a handy lightweight travel laptop for next season when I hope to be able to travel in SE Asia again over winter. 
 Since 2 years I have been stuck in Sweden over winter and it really sucks.
I have been using my  old  2011 MBP 17" before on all my travels since 2011 and also at home with no major problems,mainly  playing stored hi res files via Audirvana and Pure Music. But I prefer my iMac with streamed material, mainly YT in my case.
As far as I know one can not by-pass the internal dac on a mac with optical?
But optical out from a cd transport into Mscaler  can sound surprisingly good with well recorded 16/44.1 material.
The only time I have tried playing music via an M Air was in Malaysia in a shop with Qutest and Mscaler and it worked without problems with usb and native  hi res files up to DXD  24/358.
Unfortunately I can not remember which model it was.
But I too would be very interested to know if an M1 Air is a good idea or not with Chord  dacs?
For my purposes I will need one with at least 16 gigabyte ram  and at least a  512G SSD.
"Memory Play" in both Audivana and PM needs lots of ram.
Cheers CC


----------



## u2u2 (Jan 30, 2022)

Apple M1 user here. A 16 GB M1 Air, 16 GB 14" M1 Pro, and a 12.9" 8 GB iPad M1 Pro in my rotation. Yea too much gear... No issues with Qutest or my other DACs. Go direct, through Apple adaptors, or CalDigit docks. Streaming or network storage. Good USB cables or crap, all work fine. Plus fan noise is never an issue! Won't discount others having problems but spending a lot of time on forums and personal experience says it is not the norm.


----------



## yagislav

Do you guys find Qutest sounds best with 1V or 2V or 3V output?


----------



## RobertSM

yagislav said:


> Do you guys find Qutest sounds best with 1V or 2V or 3V output?



It depends on your other gear in your chain. My ALO Studio Six tube amp can successfully handle the 3V output. While 2V worked well, 3V shows great dynamics top to bottom.


----------



## x RELIC x

Christer said:


> .
> As far as I know one can not by-pass the internal dac on a mac with optical?
> 
> Cheers CC


Optical output will never, ever, utilize the internal Mac DAC (*D*igital to *A*nalogue *C*onverter) as the signal is all digital. The Quetest would not be able to use the signal if it were converted to analogue beforehand. You may be wondering if it bypasses Apples core audio DSP (Digital Signal Processing), but optical is always a digital only signal.


----------



## yagislav

RobertSM said:


> It depends on your other gear in your chain. My ALO Studio Six tube amp can successfully handle the 3V output. While 2V worked well, 3V shows great dynamics top to bottom.


My amplifier can handle 3V no problem. Was wondering if people noticed difference in dynamics etc between the 1,2,3V output or if there was anything in general. Thanks for your reply, I will give 3V a shot since my amplifier can handle it.


----------



## Christer

x RELIC x said:


> Optical output will never, ever, utilize the internal Mac DAC (*D*igital to *A*nalogue *C*onverter) as the signal is all digital. The Quetest would not be able to use the signal if it were converted to analogue beforehand. You may be wondering if it bypasses Apples core audio DSP (Digital Signal Processing), but optical is always a digital only signal.


Thanks, but does it bypass core audio DSP or not?
I know that both both Audirvana and Pure Music players do bypass both  when using usb connection. And the difference between both and playing a file via iTunes directly  is quite obvious to the  VERY clear benefit of the two players over iTunes. On my macs I only use iTunes for "storing" music files,but never use it for  actual playback.
Nor do I use  any of mac´s own  audio formats intentionally,but made the mistake of ripping one out of three cds from a work as AAC instead of wave and could hear the difference. When I checked it turned out the first cd was ripped  at auto setting on my i Mac which was AAC.
I now  always play whatever native format the recording is and let Mscaler do the upsampling with good results. 
Such  good results that I would  only recommend Qutest to be used with an Mscaler or possibly some other software based upsampling method like PGGB  or others.

 PS .Optical out from good cd players sounds surprisingly good via Mscaler /Qutest but I hear a difference between all three of mine making me interested in trying a cd transport without any inbuilt dac as I suspect the differences I hear could be because the dacs are not bypassed on mine.
I know that one of them a multi DVD/SACD player after a repair job is stuck sending everything as 24/96  via the internal dac since Mscaler shows it is receiving  a 24/96 signal.  
Cheers CC


----------



## kumar402 (Feb 3, 2022)

Christer said:


> Thanks, but does it bypass core audio DSP or not?
> I know that both both Audirvana and Pure Music players do bypass both  when using usb connection. And the difference between both and playing a file via iTunes directly  is quite obvious to the  VERY clear benefit of the two players over iTunes. On my macs I only use iTunes for "storing" music files,but never use it for  actual playback.
> Nor do I use  any of mac´s own  audio formats intentionally,but made the mistake of ripping one out of three cds from a work as AAC instead of wave and could hear the difference. When I checked it turned out the first cd was ripped  at auto setting on my i Mac which was AAC.
> I now  always play whatever native format the recording is and let Mscaler do the upsampling with good results.
> ...


It will bypass internal upsampling if played via Audirvana or Roon but problem with optical out from not so good source is that it is prone to jitter as the clocks are not great or of “Audiophile” grade. So better to use DDC to re-clock for reduced jitter. 
Optical has benefit when there is grounding issue with electrical plugs as optical
Connection will not cause any ground loop


----------



## JoinDivision

yagislav said:


> Do you guys find Qutest sounds best with 1V or 2V or 3V output?


Definitely sounds better (richer, fuller) the higher the voltage.

I think it's a neat little Easter egg that the colour coding of the voltage options is the same as when you buy milk in the UK.

1V = red (skimmed milk, basically white coloured water)
2V = green (semi-skimmed milk)
3V = blue (full-fat milk)

Always choose the full-fat option for the fullest flavour!


----------



## ardbeg1975

JoinDivision said:


> Definitely sounds better (richer, fuller) the higher the voltage.
> 
> I think it's a neat little Easter egg that the colour coding of the voltage options is the same as when you buy milk in the UK.
> 
> ...


For me, I think it has more to do with amp pairing rather than universally putting 3V on top. For example, if paired with a Chord Anni, Chord explicitly says to run the Qutest in 1 or 2V mode only. Given the Anni was made to pair with the Qutest, I see that as indicative that the best output voltage answer may be “it depends”.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

ardbeg1975 said:


> For me, I think it has more to do with amp pairing rather than universally putting 3V on top. For example, if paired with a Chord Anni, Chord explicitly says to run the Qutest in 1 or 2V mode only. Given the Anni was made to pair with the Qutest, I see that as indicative that the best output voltage answer may be “it depends”.


The "problem" is Anni doesn't have gain control. 3V from Qutest will be not convenient to use because there's very little room to move the volume pot when pair with medium or easy to drive headphones.

For medium to drive headphone like ZMF Verite, 2V is my preferable.


----------



## ardbeg1975

TheMiddleSky said:


> The "problem" is Anni doesn't have gain control. 3V from Qutest will be not convenient to use because there's very little room to move the volume pot when pair with medium or easy to drive headphones.
> 
> For medium to drive headphone like ZMF Verite, 2V is my preferable.


I agree with you on gain control being a variable as well but I’d say there is little room to move on the volume with the Anni regardless. Even on 1V l rarely get to 10 o'clock with a Verite on the Anni fed by Qutest. But the bass sounds really good.


----------



## mpv

Wondering how much I will gain upgrading to Hugo TT2 from Qutest ? Only asking for sound quality differences and not features.
I suspect is a better sounding dac but by how much?
Thanks in advance.


----------



## adamjohari

Is the Qutest 2 next in the pipeline? Just bought the Mojo 2 for portable/ desktop usage.


----------



## RobertSM

adamjohari said:


> Is the Qutest 2 next in the pipeline? Just bought the Mojo 2 for portable/ desktop usage.



That's a great question. 

I used to fool myself into thinking I knew how Chord developed and released new products. But the truth is I have no idea.

Qutest 2 would be fantastic. That said I'm still wishing for a qutest sized m-scaler. I can see a product like that actually giving qutest a longer life in owners homes. Thus allowing Chord to focus on other new and interesting products.

Here's to wishing on a star.  🌟


----------



## ardbeg1975

RobertSM said:


> That's a great question.
> 
> I used to fool myself into thinking I knew how Chord developed and released new products. But the truth is I have no idea.
> 
> ...


I also would love to see an m-scaler “baby” version in a Qutest sized chassis before a Qutest 2 release. That said, reading between the lines of Rob Watts’ comments re: evolution of FPGA tech during the recent Darko podcast, it seems like a smaller form factor m-scaler may be further out than I’d like.


----------



## miketlse

ardbeg1975 said:


> I also would love to see an m-scaler “baby” version in a Qutest sized chassis before a Qutest 2 release. That said, reading between the lines of Rob Watts’ comments re: evolution of FPGA tech during the recent Darko podcast, it seems like a smaller form factor m-scaler may be further out than I’d like.


His posts last weekend were also damping down posters expectations.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/post-16807586
He was so successful that even I am now pessimistic about seeing any new products during the next two years.


----------



## TheMiddleSky

mpv said:


> Wondering how much I will gain upgrading to Hugo TT2 from Qutest ? Only asking for sound quality differences and not features.
> I suspect is a better sounding dac but by how much?
> Thanks in advance.


I'd say significant (based on my experience owned hugo 2 with some desktop amp up to $3.5K, then sold everything and move to TT2).


----------



## ardbeg1975

Can anyone comment on improvement (if any) from upgrading from an iFi iPower2 to iPower X for the Qutest?


----------



## JazzAudioDog

My Qutest is no longer seen by my Apple M1 Mac Mini using USB. The Qutest doesn’t show up at all in the M1’s audio Midi device list. 

So I tried an optical connection from the M1’s headphone jack. On older Mac Mini’s the headphone jack was a dual-use copper or optical. I’ve never used it on the M1.  The Qutest was seen by the M1’s audio Midi device list as a 44k to 96k 16 bit capable pair of headphones. Music that was played sounded chipmunk-like even when the sampling rate was correct.

Is this an Apple problem or a Qutest problem? 

Any other investigation ideas?  I don’t know if it’s related or not but music played from a Bluesound Node 2i to the Qutest has sounded much thinner over the last month. Both timbre and soundstage.


----------



## ardbeg1975

JazzAudioDog said:


> My Qutest is no longer seen by my Apple M1 Mac Mini using USB. The Qutest doesn’t show up at all in the M1’s audio Midi device list.
> 
> So I tried an optical connection from the M1’s headphone jack. On older Mac Mini’s the headphone jack was a dual-use copper or optical. I’ve never used it on the M1.  The Qutest was seen by the M1’s audio Midi device list as a 44k to 96k 16 bit capable pair of headphones. Music that was played sounded chipmunk-like even when the sampling rate was correct.
> 
> ...


Eliminated the usb cable as an issue?


----------



## JazzAudioDog

Yep. The Apple M1 works fine through the same USB cable to a Cary DAC-100t.


----------



## ardbeg1975

JazzAudioDog said:


> Yep. The Apple M1 works fine through the same USB cable to a Cary DAC-100t.


Then I think unfortunately your implied suspicion that there may be a USB connector or input section fault in the Qutest may be correct. Under warranty?


----------



## ardbeg1975

Any other devices you can test usb to/from  the Qutest like an iPhone with CCK cable just to make sure Qutest usb is consistent point of error?


----------



## JazzAudioDog

I have iPhone/iPad but don’t have a CCK cable.  I wouldn’t use it for anything except this diagnostic so I need to decide if I want to spend the $.  The Qutest is a year old, 
I hope still under warranty. I’ll call the retailer Tuesday (after the holiday).
Thanks for your suggestions!


----------



## JazzAudioDog

JazzAudioDog said:


> I don’t know if it’s related or not but music played from a Bluesound Node 2i to the Qutest has sounded much thinner over the last month. Both timbre and soundstage.


The “much thinner” sound I heard is not due to the Qutest. I think it’s been there for some time and became more noticeable due to improvements I’ve made.  While investigating the problem I read about what audiophiles were doing to address sound degradation caused by their routers and networks in streaming systems. Adding audiophile switches and LPSs to their routers, etc.  

Previously I never believed that stuff. But I figured what the heck. I didn’t purchase anything. I had two available outlets on my Furutech power bar which fed into my Shunyata Hydra power conditioner.  I’d always kept the router plugged directly into a wall outlet. I reconfigured the Furutech to give the router’s large SMPS it’s own not-shared duplex plug in the star-grounded Furutech. Holy crap! Clearer highs, better imaging, fleshier mid-stage and beefier bass for zero cost!  The next couple days of listening will hopefully prove or reject cognitive bias. 

I’m posting here in the Qutest forum because I started my problem diagnosis here but also because I think it shows how the streaming network can affect sound quality in Qutest systems.  I wouldn’t have believed it if I had not experienced it myself.


----------



## ddaktiv

Rob Watts said:


> The BNC inputs are designed to work with 768kHz inputs, and this precludes using transformers, as they typically are too slow. It is a very sensitive input, much less than 1v peak to peak, and set to 75 ohms.
> 
> Qutest was not designed for use with slow ramp up and ramp down PSUs, and although it shouldn't damage the FPGA (as the PSUs start-up and shutdown sequence is controlled via precision enables) I can't guarantee the rest of the circuitry. Not using the stock PSU invalidates the Chord warranty, so this is very much at your risk.


May I know how to use the bnc inputs, I’ve owned the qutest for a few years now and have yet to try the bnc inputs. 
If possible please direct me to products I can look into? Currently using Roon and in the process of updating the endpoint to connect to the qutest but curiously I have no idea what products I can use for the bnc’s


----------



## JazzAudioDog

I use an AudioQuest Carbon digital coaxial cable with an AudioQuest BNC adapter on the end connected to one of the BNC ports on the Qutest. Source streamer is a Bluesound Node 2i.

If the Qutest is really that limited Chord should have cautions and use limitations listed in the owner’s manual as well as on the box.  The Sbooster compatibility list shows Qutest as “compatible”.


----------



## kumar402

JazzAudioDog said:


> The “much thinner” sound I heard is not due to the Qutest. I think it’s been there for some time and became more noticeable due to improvements I’ve made.  While investigating the problem I read about what audiophiles were doing to address sound degradation caused by their routers and networks in streaming systems. Adding audiophile switches and LPSs to their routers, etc.
> 
> Previously I never believed that stuff. But I figured what the heck. I didn’t purchase anything. I had two available outlets on my Furutech power bar which fed into my Shunyata Hydra power conditioner.  I’d always kept the router plugged directly into a wall outlet. I reconfigured the Furutech to give the router’s large SMPS it’s own not-shared duplex plug in the star-grounded Furutech. Holy crap! Clearer highs, better imaging, fleshier mid-stage and beefier bass for zero cost!  The next couple days of listening will hopefully prove or reject cognitive bias.
> 
> I’m posting here in the Qutest forum because I started my problem diagnosis here but also because I think it shows how the streaming network can affect sound quality in Qutest systems.  I wouldn’t have believed it if I had not experienced it myself.


Did you connect your router with your streamer via LAN cable that was carrying some.dirty power? Or May be the SMPS was polluting the power line to which you DAC or amp was connecting. Just thinking how come better power to Router has so much Impact on sound.


----------



## JazzAudioDog (Feb 21, 2022)

The router was originally plugged into a plain-vanilla wall mains duplex power socket on a daisy-chain shared service line.  That line is completely separate from the stereo system power supply.

My stereo system is powered by two fully independent and dedicated homerun 10 ga cable runs to the breaker box. Each one has an audiophile duplex. The one used for digital components goes to a Shunyata Hydra power conditioner. Outlets in addition to the 4 in the Hydra are provided by a Furutech audiophile star-grounded power bar that takes it’s power from the Hydra. All the power cables are Shunyata.

When I recently moved the router’s SMPS to the Furutech the router went from zero power conditioning to extensive power conditioning. In the original configuration it may have been contaminating it’s ethernet output to the streamer due to dirty power on the shared-service power line it was using.

I’m only an hour into listening on the second day after the change but it’s been a remarkable improvement. The noise reduction has been significant resulting in much better clarity. Imaging is also better. It’s so clean I can turn the volume higher. Bass is tighter.  There’s an “ease” to CD-res and hi-res streaming music that wasn’t there before the change.


----------



## creativepart

JazzAudioDog said:


> *So I tried an optical connection from the M1’s headphone jack. On older Mac Mini’s the headphone jack was a dual-use copper or optical. I’ve never used it on the M1.  *


There are no M1 Minis or M1 iMacs that have the Optical S/PDIF 3.5" port. In fact, no Mac Mini since 2017 has had that dual purpose headphone/Optical output.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

creativepart said:


> There are no M1 Minis or M1 iMacs that have the Optical S/PDIF 3.5" port. In fact, no Mac Mini since 2017 has had that dual purpose headphone/Optical output.


I discovered that while researching after I posted. My old Mac Mini, which the M1 replaced, is a 2009 so it had the dual-use socket.  Apple would never *intentionally* remove a nice capability, would they? Never. Ha, ha.  Shame on me!


----------



## ardbeg1975

JazzAudioDog said:


> I discovered that while researching after I posted. My old Mac Mini, which the M1 replaced, is a 2009 so it had the dual-use socket.  Apple would never *intentionally* remove a nice capability, would they? Never. Ha, ha.  Shame on me!


Apple is very good at a lot of things, including killing off (frequently) usable ports.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

GreenBow said:


> Have a question though please. I normally unplug the Qutest overnight, but left it plugged in for maybe two days. It runs on my PC.
> 
> Today I started up my PC twice. The second time (after I had been out for a walk) the Qutest did not register the PC. I could not get sound, and after looking at settings and whatever I could think of. I looked in the port window and noticed that there was no sampling rate light. I restarted the Qutest and all was good.





JazzAudioDog said:


> My Qutest is no longer seen by my Apple M1 Mac Mini using USB. The Qutest doesn’t show up at all in the M1’s audio Midi device list.


I leave my Qutest on 24x7. I searched through old posts and found GreenBow’s old post #4045 where he had the same problem I have now and he fixed it with a Qutest restart. Tomorrow I’ll try that. Thanks GreenBow!

But actually I found it by accident while researching a different topic.  In my original searches I have a Mac Mini and GreenBow has a PC and apparently they never met up in the search engine.


----------



## ardbeg1975

JazzAudioDog said:


> I leave my Qutest on 24x7. I searched through old posts and found GreenBow’s old post #4045 where he had the same problem I have now and he fixed it with a Qutest restart. Tomorrow I’ll try that. Thanks GreenBow!
> 
> But actually I found it by accident while researching a different topic.  In my original searches I have a Mac Mini and GreenBow has a PC and apparently they never met up in the search engine.


While not  necessarily the best (cheapest) solve, I moved my Qutest from direct PC connected to proxied via a Zen streamer and have had no Qutest connectivity issues thereafter but I will caveat by saying that while the Zen sounds great in combo with the Qutest it is a finicky gadget.


----------



## JazzAudioDog

ardbeg1975 said:


> While not  necessarily the best (cheapest) solve, I moved my Qutest from direct PC connected to proxied via a Zen streamer and have had no Qutest connectivity issues thereafter but I will caveat by saying that while the Zen sounds great in combo with the Qutest it is a finicky gadget.


Wish I could do that! My Bluesound Node 2i only has an optical input and my M1 Mac Mini only has USB outputs. No optical output that the old Mac Minis had.  Bummer!


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

There has been a lot of talk about the qutest running of battery power lately and just wanted to ask weather
it was worth perusing does it make a difference or am i wasting my time?
i purchased an anker battery power bank but unsure if its safe to use , there is an online article stating that 
the power bank needs to be 5v which the power bank has but its the amps im not sure about .
it states that it has to be 2.4amps ? the one i have is 3amps , would that be to much for the qutest or will it damage
the dac.
any advise would be great guys thank you.


----------



## uzi2

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> There has been a lot of talk about the qutest running of battery power lately and just wanted to ask weather
> it was worth perusing does it make a difference or am i wasting my time?
> i purchased an anker battery power bank but unsure if its safe to use , there is an online article stating that
> the power bank needs to be 5v which the power bank has but its the amps im not sure about .
> ...


The voltage is important. The Qutest will only draw the amps it requires...


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

uzi2 said:


> The voltage is important. The Qutest will only draw the amps it requires...


So it will be ok to use the power bank at 3amps ?
Thanks for the info


----------



## Victorr

Nicholasheadfi2 said:


> o it will be ok to use the power bank at 3amps ?


Yes, you can.
The power supply will supply the power that the DAC can consume. 3A is its maximum capability.


----------



## up late (Mar 6, 2022)

having read a 400 page thread feels like an achievement of sorts, particularly when roughly a third of it is taken-up with posts about after-market power supplies. i also want to take this opportunity to compliment rob watts on his unfailing ability to respectfully answer the same questions repeatedly.


----------



## Nicholasheadfi2

Victorr said:


> Yes, you can.
> The power supply will supply the power that the DAC can consume. 3A is its maximum capability.


thank you very much .


----------



## DJW50

New Qutest owner here, set it up to my Pathos Inpol Ear and it sounds very good indeed. I also have a large collection of HDCD’s and Japanese ultradiscs that I play through a Cyrus CDt XR and these sound as good as they do through my Bow Technologies ZZ8. I’m running Amazon HD stored on a new iPad and again sounds fantastic through both the Focal Stellia’s and the Utopia’s. Having only recently bought this lot I’m going to wait and save up for the M Scaler.


----------



## ardbeg1975

DJW50 said:


> New Qutest owner here, set it up to my Pathos Inpol Ear and it sounds very good indeed. I also have a large collection of HDCD’s and Japanese ultradiscs that I play through a Cyrus CDt XR and these sound as good as they do through my Bow Technologies ZZ8. I’m running Amazon HD stored on a new iPad and again sounds fantastic through both the Focal Stellia’s and the Utopia’s. Having only recently bought this lot I’m going to wait and save up for the M Scaler.


Before diving into the expense of an Mscaler, I’d recommend trying out HQPlayer upsampling and possibility an upgraded power supply. Then maybe the Mscaler.


----------



## DJW50 (Mar 14, 2022)

ardbeg1975 said:


> Before diving into the expense of an Mscaler, I’d recommend trying out HQPlayer upsampling and possibility an upgraded power supply. Then maybe the Mscaler.


Thanks not heard of HQ Player but will have a look is it simple to use for simple folk?
Also I’m not very flush now so may wait for the M Scaler 2


----------



## ardbeg1975 (Mar 14, 2022)

DJW50 said:


> Thanks not heard of HQ Player but will have a look is it simple to use for simple folk?
> Also I’m not very flush now so may wait for the M Scaler 2


Unfortunately I wouldn’t call HQPlayer simple. It is one if those pieces of software where reading the manual helps but the forums have some guidance on suggested settings. And it works best with Roon so if you don’t use Roon, that may sway your opinion negatively.


----------



## DJW50

ardbeg1975 said:


> Unfortunately I wouldn’t call HQPlayer simple. It is one if those pieces of software where reading the manual helps but the forums have some guidance on suggested settings. And it works best with Roon so if you don’t use Roon, that may sway your opinion negatively.


Thanks, I'll give it a miss then and wait and save for the next M Scaler.
Currently going through some of my favourite HDCD's and it really does sound very good indeed, may look into power supply later.


----------



## DJW50

How do you turn it off?


----------



## ardbeg1975

You don’t (short of unplugging it).


----------



## uzi2 (Mar 14, 2022)

DJW50 said:


> How do you turn it off?


The simplest way is to get an inline switch. Best place to look is the Raspberry Pi suppliers, but their current models use USB-C, so make sure you get the older version.
This would do the trick.


----------



## DJW50

Thanks for the replies, I guess if Chord designed it to stay on there shouldn't be an issue but the plug looks a better alternative.
Great DAC I have to say.


----------



## JaquesGelee

DJW50 said:


> How do you turn it off?


The Qutest is meant to be an always on device. But it is up to you what you are doing with your unit.


----------



## LegionofDoom (Mar 15, 2022)

After a lot of research and personal reflection I am down to either the Qutest or a Gungnir (mb).   My amp is Burson GT and cans are ZMF vc.    I have endeavored to pin myself down on just how much detail I want.   I do like detail, but ultimately my primary musical taste is rock/pop so the genre itself does not offer perhaps what jazz or classical would for "ruthlessly revealing" content to experience in most listening sessions.   As such, bass and musical "groove" are important to me.    If I had one litmus test above all others, it would be which one makes you tap your toes, nod your head to the beat, and say "gee, this sounds great"?    The Burson GT nails this for me at the amp stage and I could not be happier with the ZMFs.. 

I plan to run a Pro-ject Stream Box Ultra over USB as the source (via Roon).    I mentally favor XLR outs from the DAC to the amp---but if the Qutest is a better fit I won't be hung up on interconnections.     Words of wisdom and experience are welcomed!


----------



## DJW50 (Mar 15, 2022)

LegionofDoom said:


> After a lot of research and personal reflection I am down to either the Qutest or a Gungnir (mb).   My amp is Burson GT and cans are ZMF vc.    I have endeavored to pin myself down on just how much detail I want.   I do like detail, but ultimately my primary musical taste is rock/pop so the genre itself does not offer perhaps what jazz or classical would for content to benefit most listening sessions.   As such, bass and musical "groove" are important to.    If I had one litmus test above all others, it would be which one makes you tap your toes, nod your head to the beat, and say "gee, this sounds great"?    The Burson GT names this for me at the amp stage and I could not be happier with the ZMFs..
> 
> I plan to run a Pro-ject Stream Box Ultra over USB as the source (via Roon).    I mentally favor XLR outs from the DAC to the amp---but if the Qutest is a better fit I won't be hung up on interconnections.     Words of wisdom and experience are welcomed!


You've just described my experience with the Qutest, it is very 'musical' I always play Texas Flood by SRV as a test because my band used to play it and I know the bass line note for note and it's all there to hear. My Pathos has XLR's and I would have favoured that option but I have some decent Chord interconnects so I'm happy with that. The acoustic guitar intro to Wishbone Ash's Time Was is so crisp and clear too. But I do find myself getting lost in the rhythm with the Qutest plus there is the bonus at some time of adding the M Scaler if you wish.
All in all I'm very pleased with all aspects of the Qutest, but it's all down to personal taste best try one if you can, I did and bought one.


----------



## Reactcore (Mar 18, 2022)

LegionofDoom said:


> I do like detail, but ultimately my primary musical taste is rock/pop so the genre itself does not offer perhaps what jazz or classical would for "ruthlessly revealing" content to experience in most listening sessions.   As such, bass and musical "groove" are important to me.


Make no mistake.. Qutest can make rock/pop shine too.. Chord Dac's retrieve details and sphere from real instrument and voice recordings best.

So if a rock song is played and mic recorded/mixed or better in a live setting.. your mind can be blown.

Its with totally electronic generated music it wont scale extra compared to other brands imo..  maybe just a bit less fatiqueing in long listening sessions.

In a word.. the details must be there to be able to processed and heard


----------



## DJW50

LegionofDoom said:


> After a lot of research and personal reflection I am down to either the Qutest or a Gungnir (mb).   My amp is Burson GT and cans are ZMF vc.    I have endeavored to pin myself down on just how much detail I want.   I do like detail, but ultimately my primary musical taste is rock/pop so the genre itself does not offer perhaps what jazz or classical would for "ruthlessly revealing" content to experience in most listening sessions.   As such, bass and musical "groove" are important to me.    If I had one litmus test above all others, it would be which one makes you tap your toes, nod your head to the beat, and say "gee, this sounds great"?    The Burson GT nails this for me at the amp stage and I could not be happier with the ZMFs..
> 
> I plan to run a Pro-ject Stream Box Ultra over USB as the source (via Roon).    I mentally favor XLR outs from the DAC to the amp---but if the Qutest is a better fit I won't be hung up on interconnections.     Words of wisdom and experience are welcomed!


Just to add to my previous thoughts about the Qutest, having had it for a couple of weeks now and assume that both the unit and the interconnects have settled in I'm still very impressed with the sound. As I mentioned being a bass player in my past I suppose I'm always listening out for any bass related parts of the music I listen to for any kind of reference as to the true and accurate reproduction of the instrument. Having listened to some early Yes material I can report that the distinctive tone characteristics of the Rickenbacker Bass they used are absolutely spot on.  One other musical point having seen Buddy Guy live a few times he has often struck a note and the combination of feedback and sustain made women in the audience scream and me to almost pass out. This is reproduced on the tribute to SRV CD's with such gusto it was like being there again. I like the Qutest.


----------



## LegionofDoom (Mar 29, 2022)

Does anyone have thoughts on when Chord might "update" the Qutest?   Given the 2018 introduction, are we on some sort of timeline where a product refresh/upgrade would make sense?  Does Chord have a cadence for these things?  Granted parts availability means a whole different set of challenges to historical cadences!

Just curious as I am considering a purchase.


----------



## Reactcore

LegionofDoom said:


> Does anyone have thoughts on when Chord might "update" the Qutest?   Given the 2018 introduction, are we on some sort of timeline where a product refresh/upgrade would made sense?  Does Chord have a cadence for these things?  Granted parts availability means a whole different set of challenges to historical cadences!
> 
> Just curious as I am considering a purchase.


I recently read Rob hasnt started working on a sucessor.. i guess u wont be confronted with a new release soon


----------



## DJW50

LegionofDoom said:


> Does anyone have thoughts on when Chord might "update" the Qutest?   Given the 2018 introduction, are we on some sort of timeline where a product refresh/upgrade would make sense?  Does Chord have a cadence for these things?  Granted parts availability means a whole different set of challenges to historical cadences!
> 
> Just curious as I am considering a purchase.


My thoughts were that for my purpose using it as the DAC for my Pathos it will probably be long term, I intend to add an M Scaler at some stage when finance permits. I do wonder if the M Scaler is due a new model though.


----------



## Triode User

DJW50 said:


> My thoughts were that for my purpose using it as the DAC for my Pathos it will probably be long term, I intend to add an M Scaler at some stage when finance permits. I do wonder if the M Scaler is due a new model though.


There is another Mscaler due at the end of this year but it will not replace the existing one. The new one will be in the Choral range to match the Dave and guessing will be in a similar price range to Dave.


----------



## The Jester

Bonus may be those with a Dave and MScaler may well upgrade and provide the market with some S/H Hugo Mscalers ?


----------



## DJW50

Triode User said:


> There is another Mscaler due at the end of this year but it will not replace the existing one. The new one will be in the Choral range to match the Dave and guessing will be in a similar price range to Dave.


Thanks, as good as the M Scaler obviously is the current one is quite dear enough for me.


----------



## Nostoi

Anyone got a recommendation for a short (20cm to 30cm) RCA interconnect? Plenty of 0.5m ones but hardly anything shorter.


----------



## RobertSM

Nostoi said:


> Anyone got a recommendation for a short (20cm to 30cm) RCA interconnect? Plenty of 0.5m ones but hardly anything shorter.



It seems like the shorter ones aren't as common. You could always put an order in with Moon Audio. They do custom lengths, any size you want.


----------



## Nostoi

RobertSM said:


> It seems like the shorter ones aren't as common. You could always put an order in with Moon Audio. They do custom lengths, any size you want.


Many thanks, just ordered a few cables from Moon Audio in fact but they've already shipped, otherwise I would have added to the load. Good suggestion, though. 

In any case, I ordered these https://www.akustik-projekt.at/kabel/cinch-rca/2163/pro-ject-connect-it-rca-si-20-5cm

Length is good, specs are good. Let's see how they sound.


----------



## Nostoi

Nostoi said:


> Many thanks, just ordered a few cables from Moon Audio in fact but they've already shipped, otherwise I would have added to the load. Good suggestion, though.
> 
> In any case, I ordered these https://www.akustik-projekt.at/kabel/cinch-rca/2163/pro-ject-connect-it-rca-si-20-5cm
> 
> Length is good, specs are good. Let's see how they sound.


For anyone interested/cares, these short RCA interconnects work very well and sound good....I recommend:


----------



## Reactcore

Nostoi said:


> For anyone interested/cares, these short RCA interconnects work very well and sound good....I recommend:


Those look neat👌
I have the same theory: Cable length thats not there cant degrade anything.
Thats why my interconnects and my HP cable are short too.


----------



## LegionofDoom

I am curious what experiences people have with toggling the output voltage?    I have settled on 3V, which for my system seems to push up the details and "sharpen" the edges just a bit.   I tend to like that over "smooth"....but not to any extremes and not in all frequencies.  I tend to run the Green filter, for example.

My Burson amp allows for different levels of crossfeed, which I did not use prior to the Qutest, but with it I set my crossfeed on "low".  I really like the balance that brings to stage.

Ultimately I feel like I am playing ping pong a bit with SQ attributes.  Bouncing up and down around a desired sound signature.   The good news is the Qutest helps me get there!


----------



## DJW50

LegionofDoom said:


> I am curious what experiences people have with toggling the output voltage?    I have settled on 3V, which for my system seems to push up the details and "sharpen" the edges just a bit.   I tend to like that over "smooth"....but not to any extremes and not in all frequencies.  I tend to run the Green filter, for example.
> 
> My Burson amp allows for different levels of crossfeed, which I did not use prior to the Qutest, but with it I set my crossfeed on "low".  I really like the balance that brings to stage.
> 
> Ultimately I feel like I am playing ping pong a bit with SQ attributes.  Bouncing up and down around a desired sound signature.   The good news is the Qutest helps me get there!


I'm currently running mine on 3V, tried the others. My Pathos Inpol Ear has a maximum input of 4V so I'm not running it too hot.
Not bothered with the filters yet as I'm running in both the headphones and some new valves.


----------



## Nostoi

Are there any RCA splitters available, such that I can run two amps from the Qutest without having to change cables each time? I have tried both the Audioquest hard splitter and now the ViaBlue variant. Both don't work (ViaBlue doesn't even fit)...

Thanks.


----------



## DJW50

Don't know if anyone has seen this, I like the reviews he does.


----------



## LegionofDoom (Apr 23, 2022)

I have a power supply question.  If I connected a Qutest to a 5V/4A linear power supply, whould that harm the unit?  I think the Qutest is spec’d for a 5V/2A draw.  So would 4A be too hot?   Or is it simply overhead that really won’t be used, so it won’t be a problem?  I was under the impression that so long as the DC voltage is correctly matched and amps are “enough”…that more than enough A is not a problem.


----------



## JelStIy

LegionofDoom said:


> I have a power supply question.  If I connected a Qutest to a 5V/4A linear power supply, whould that harm the unit?  I think the Qutest is spec’d for a 5V/2A draw.  So would 4A be too hot?   Or is it simply overhead that really won’t be used, so it won’t be a problem?  I was under the impression that so long as the DC voltage is correctly matched and amps are “enough”…that more than enough A is not a problem.


Correct, you need to match the voltage and amperage can be higher.


----------



## RobertSM

LegionofDoom said:


> I have a power supply question.  If I connected a Qutest to a 5V/4A linear power supply, whould that harm the unit?  I think the Qutest is spec’d for a 5V/2A draw.  So would 4A be too hot?   Or is it simply overhead that really won’t be used, so it won’t be a problem?  I was under the impression that so long as the DC voltage is correctly matched and amps are “enough”…that more than enough A is not a problem.



You are correct. The unit will only use the amps it requires.


----------



## Reactcore

LegionofDoom said:


> I have a power supply question.  If I connected a Qutest to a 5V/4A linear power supply, whould that harm the unit?  I think the Qutest is spec’d for a 5V/2A draw.  So would 4A be too hot?   Or is it simply overhead that really won’t be used, so it won’t be a problem?  I was under the impression that so long as the DC voltage is correctly matched and amps are “enough”…that more than enough A is not a problem.



No worries.
Qutest will draw about 1A on 5V.
The stock PSU is also rated with overhead.


----------



## Jetblack08

Question... I purchased the Qutest to listen through headphones but was not aware that it was a Dac with no volume of it's own. What set up is the best way to listen through headphones? The amps I use are the Wells Audio Milo and the Phonitor X.


----------



## Nostoi

Jetblack08 said:


> Question... I purchased the Qutest to listen through headphones but was not aware that it was a Dac with no volume of it's own. What set up is the best way to listen through headphones? The amps I use are the Wells Audio Milo and the Phonitor X.


Oops. 

There's no best way, as such, you simply connect to an amp of your taste/preference (or budget). Qutest is clean enough to get along with most amps.


----------



## Jetblack08

Nostoi said:


> Oops.
> 
> There's no best way, as such, you simply connect to an amp of your taste/preference (or budget). Qutest is clean enough to get along with most amps.


There doesn’t seem to be enough power when simply connected through either amp. Totally devoid of bass. Would a pre-amp help?


----------



## Nostoi

Jetblack08 said:


> There doesn’t seem to be enough power when simply connected through either amp. Totally devoid of bass. Would a pre-amp help?


What headphones?


----------



## alxw0w

Maybe you have set lower output voltage in the qutest?
It can be selected from 3V 2,5V and 1V if I'm not mistaken.
Look in the manual.


----------



## Jetblack08

Nostoi said:


> What headphones?


Susvara, HE6se, Arya v2 among others.


----------



## Nostoi

Jetblack08 said:


> Susvara, HE6se, Arya v2 among others.


The problem might be specific to the Susvara, the bass of which seems highly amp dependent. But indeed double check your on the highest voltages setting on the Qutest.


----------



## Jetblack08

Nostoi said:


> The problem might be specific to the Susvara, the bass of which seems highly amp dependent. But indeed double check your on the highest voltages setting on the Qutest.


How is this done?


----------



## alxw0w

Jetblack08 said:


> How is this done?


For example by looking into the manual.


----------



## Jetblack08

alxw0w said:


> For example by looking into the manual.


I don’t see it in the manual.


----------



## alxw0w

Jetblack08 said:


> I don’t see it in the manual.


----------



## Nostoi

Jetblack08 said:


> I don’t see it in the manual.


It's in there. You need to press filter/input together when it's booting.


----------



## Jetblack08

Nostoi said:


> It's in there. You need to press filter/input together when it's booting.


I see it now. Thank you VERY MUCH!!!


----------



## u2u2

Jetblack08 said:


> I see it now. Thank you VERY MUCH!!!


Exercise some care with the voltage selections. Be sure your amp can handle what you select. For example, Chord Anni can only handle up to 2 volts. From experience, absent a software volume control, I can say some headphone amps are a handful with Qutest, unless you use a pre amp. Going low with 1 volt will cost sound quality. As always, YMMV. I have been having good results with Audirvana Origin lately. Using it with Qutest/Anni/Stellia combination today.


----------



## RobertSM

Jetblack08 said:


> Question... I purchased the Qutest to listen through headphones but was not aware that it was a Dac with no volume of it's own. What set up is the best way to listen through headphones? The amps I use are the Wells Audio Milo and the Phonitor X.



I used to own the Phonitor X and paired it with the qutest. It's a great combination.

With either the Milo or the Phonitor X run your RCA outs from the qutest to the RCA ins on your amp. Experiment with qutest output voltages on 1,2 or 3 volts to find which pairs best with respective amp. I don't recall what output voltage I used with qutest when I owned Phonitor X. I believe it was 2 volts. Of course with Phonitor X you have alot of possible customizations due to all the DIP switches that adjust gain and whatnot.


----------



## Jetblack08

RobertSM said:


> I used to own the Phonitor X and paired it with the qutest. It's a great combination.
> 
> With either the Milo or the Phonitor X run your RCA outs from the qutest to the RCA ins on your amp. Experiment with qutest output voltages on 1,2 or 3 volts to find which pairs best with respective amp. I don't recall what output voltage I used with qutest when I owned Phonitor X. I believe it was 2 volts. Of course with Phonitor X you have alot of possible customizations due to all the DIP switches that adjust gain and whatnot.


Noted


----------



## Reactcore

Jetblack08 said:


> Question... I purchased the Qutest to listen through headphones but was not aware that it was a Dac with no volume of it's own. What set up is the best way to listen through headphones? The amps I use are the Wells Audio Milo and the Phonitor X.



You can play straight to HP using volume control on a player app like foobar hiby etc.
I played a long time through my HD800's

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-qutest-dac-official-thread.869417/post-15222804


----------



## DJW50

Does anyone know why the light you can see through the top glass has gone blue with red since I connected the AURALiC ARIES G1 to it. before with the iPad it was pure blue now I have the red bit in it too.


----------



## Atriya (Apr 27, 2022)

When the Qutest is fed a 705/768Khz signal via dual-BNC (e.g. when an M-Scaler is connected), are the physical white/green/red/orange filter settings on the Qutest now completely irrelevant (i.e. do they have no effect at all)?

EDIT: I realized it's not so simple, with WTA1 and WTA2 filters applied in succession. Still any information on what setting M-scaler users use on their Qutest would be helpful.


----------



## The Jester (May 10, 2022)

Filters on the Qutest operate the same with or without the MScaler


----------



## gasmonkey

Stupid question, but does the Qutest accept a range of voltages? or just 5V?

I know USB is 5V standard, hence the specification. BUT, if this product DIDN't use USB, might it offer a range of voltages, like 5-6v? or 5-9v?

AND no need to inform me that this would void the warrranty, I'm well aware. 

Just wondering.....


----------



## DJW50

gasmonkey said:


> Stupid question, but does the Qutest accept a range of voltages? or just 5V?
> 
> I know USB is 5V standard, hence the specification. BUT, if this product DIDN't use USB, might it offer a range of voltages, like 5-6v? or 5-9v?
> 
> ...


I think you have to stick to the stated voltage, there are some very good LPS units for the Qutest.


----------



## DJW50

For the owners of the Qutest who like me may wonder how it rates against other much more expensive DAC's thought I'd share my findings.
My system consists of Pathos Inpol Ear, an Auralic Aries G1 streamer and Focal Stellia's and Utopia's. There is an offer for PS Audio's Bitstream DAC at a retail £5000 DAC on offer at the moment for £1600 off so I thought I'd try it. Today I spent many enjoyable hours comparing them and guess what, there was no noticeable difference. In fact the Qutest played the very high resolution Amazon Ultra HD tracks whereas the PS Audio refused.
If I had any doubts about the Qutest as a super DAC they have gone, I will in future try other high end DAC's to see if I can replace it.


----------



## Reactcore

DJW50 said:


> For the owners of the Qutest who like me may wonder how it rates against other much more expensive DAC's thought I'd share my findings.
> My system consists of Pathos Inpol Ear, an Auralic Aries G1 streamer and Focal Stellia's and Utopia's. There is an offer for PS Audio's Bitstream DAC at a retail £5000 DAC on offer at the moment for £1600 off so I thought I'd try it. Today I spent many enjoyable hours comparing them and guess what, there was no noticeable difference. In fact the Qutest played the very high resolution Amazon Ultra HD tracks whereas the PS Audio refused.
> If I had any doubts about the Qutest as a super DAC they have gone, I will in future try other high end DAC's to see if I can replace it.


Once one became aware and appreciate the Chord sound.. it cant be found in other brand's products even at much higher prices. Its just too addictive


----------



## DJW50

Reactcore said:


> Once one became aware and appreciate the Chord sound.. it cant be found in other brand's products even at much higher prices. Its just too addictive


I agree it's a cracking DAC that to date I can't fault. Just to say I've also added a PS Audio Stellar Power Plant 3 and a fairly expensive MCRU LPS to power the Qutest. I've got plans to try the M Scaler with the Qutest just to see if it makes a difference, although I'm not that happy about having to buy those BNC leads at well over £1000 but I'll see what results I get.


----------



## Reactcore

DJW50 said:


> I agree it's a cracking DAC that to date I can't fault. Just to say I've also added a PS Audio Stellar Power Plant 3 and a fairly expensive MCRU LPS to power the Qutest. I've got plans to try the M Scaler with the Qutest just to see if it makes a difference, although I'm not that happy about having to buy those BNC leads at well over £1000 but I'll see what results I get.



Caution advised.. be sure you are able to get a HMS.. once you heard its impact on the right tracks you cant go without one 😄 

Actually.. i never dared to try.. affraid of the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) Then she got me one for Xmas😇 

It was the same with Dave.. i refused to audition it until i suddenly got the funds


----------



## JazzAudioDog

IZONE said:


> Yeah before I got the Qutest I read a lot of official statements from Chord / Rob that Qutest only needs the stock power adapter and USB cable... but a lot of people reported differences so I got curious. I bought iFi's iPower adapter and it made a noticeable difference for me, so much so that I went out and bought the iPower X which is a much more expensive adapter and experienced another bump in quality. I'm also using the iFi Silencer+ on my USB port. Sorry, I don't mean to come off as an iFi whore but my dealer only carries iFi for power/jitter needs. I'm not affiliated with iFi at all. I'm using a Furutech USB cable which is just a small level up from a basic cable. Oh and I also got myself a heavy-duty power strip with thicker gauges and more isolation from noise. Honestly, I wish I didn't hear a difference so I could save some coin but I do, so I'm leaving this for my fellow Chord Qutest lovers in case they want it as a data point. Also, kind of strange for me to say this but burn the F-out of the Qutest... seems to improve over time for me. This is of course all subjective and in my experience only. I don't recommend it to anyone unless you are curious like me


Yes, burn-in is key. A dealer, not mine, recommended 1000 hours. I clearly heard improved performance through 650 hours. Yes, I logged listening experience.


----------



## dac64

lol! Page 404... I got to post something...

Listening to this CD via HMS/Qutest/isolated transformers/power wedge power condition/HD converters/fiber optic/BNC adapters/symposium platforms/Pump wedge/RCBOs...on 2ch

Beautiful!!!


----------



## piakoB

Have had my Qutest since Christmas 2021. Really like the upgrade. I moved from a Cambridge DacMagic circa 2018 to a SMSL M500 in 2020 and got my Qutest end of last year (2021). Overall it's been an excellent upgrade. I usually run it on the orange setting for a warm filter at the 2V (green) output using a USB input from the RoPieeeXL transport. I found that paired with a set of planars it really shines since usually planars are resolving along with the Qutest being fairly resolving. I set aside the Anandas I was using though and put them into storage and am currently using the HD660s with the Lyr 3 and Furman conditioner. Have found that the planars are generally better for the genres I normally listen to which are pop and jazz. But the 660s are really more of a better all-around headphone for all genres including anything with guitars or electric guitars which is the reason I haven't made much of a change in the past few months with the choice of headphones. But from my testing the real magic of the Qutest can be heard best with some planars that are resolving because the detail of the dac really is accentuated by planars (my Ananda). After getting the Qutest I really have no need or desire to upgrade anything in my system. Only things I'm looking at currently for maybe getting in 2023-2024 are a set of Arya's and/or a Woo amp (either a 6 or 22) -- haven't decided on the model yet. Currently things are sounding really good and it's been nice to sit back and just listen and not worry about stuff such as mind games over system shortcomings. Qutest has been a major part of that peace of mind so to say. Obviously it's not Chord's top of the line product but for what it is and the price/performance I could not be happier. In fact if I did not change any gear in the next 5 years I would still be happy because with all the cables and tweaks I've done it seems finally like a respectable mid-fi system. Come to think I will probably pull the Ananda's out of their resting place and put on some tunes just to get some of that combo magic.


----------



## DJW50

piakoB said:


> Have had my Qutest since Christmas 2021. Really like the upgrade. I moved from a Cambridge DacMagic circa 2018 to a SMSL M500 in 2020 and got my Qutest end of last year (2021). Overall it's been an excellent upgrade. I usually run it on the orange setting for a warm filter at the 2V (green) output using a USB input from the RoPieeeXL transport. I found that paired with a set of planars it really shines since usually planars are resolving along with the Qutest being fairly resolving. I set aside the Anandas I was using though and put them into storage and am currently using the HD660s with the Lyr 3 and Furman conditioner. Have found that the planars are generally better for the genres I normally listen to which are pop and jazz. But the 660s are really more of a better all-around headphone for all genres including anything with guitars or electric guitars which is the reason I haven't made much of a change in the past few months with the choice of headphones. But from my testing the real magic of the Qutest can be heard best with some planars that are resolving because the detail of the dac really is accentuated by planars (my Ananda). After getting the Qutest I really have no need or desire to upgrade anything in my system. Only things I'm looking at currently for maybe getting in 2023-2024 are a set of Arya's and/or a Woo amp (either a 6 or 22) -- haven't decided on the model yet. Currently things are sounding really good and it's been nice to sit back and just listen and not worry about stuff such as mind games over system shortcomings. Qutest has been a major part of that peace of mind so to say. Obviously it's not Chord's top of the line product but for what it is and the price/performance I could not be happier. In fact if I did not change any gear in the next 5 years I would still be happy because with all the cables and tweaks I've done it seems finally like a respectable mid-fi system. Come to think I will probably pull the Ananda's out of their resting place and put on some tunes just to get some of that combo magic.


I agree I find the Qutest is fine for my needs at the moment. I did invest in a fairly expensive LPS in the MCRU Ultimate and also a PS Audio Stellar Powerplant 3 which combined seemed to expand the soundstage. I have tried 6 DAC's since buying the Qutest and have sent them all back some were 6 times the price of the Qutest.
I will eventually try a DAVE but by the time I've had my money's worth out of the Qutest a new model DAVE will be out.


----------



## piakoB

Is this the one?
https://www.mcru.co.uk/product/mcru-ultimate-linear-power-supply-for-chord-qutest-dac/
I'm wondering if they ship to the US.


----------



## DJW50 (Jun 21, 2022)

piakoB said:


> Is this the one?
> https://www.mcru.co.uk/product/mcru-ultimate-linear-power-supply-for-chord-qutest-dac/
> I'm wondering if they ship to the US.


Yes, they are a pretty organised company so I guess they will. Combined with the PS Audio Powerplant 3 it really has made a difference.
Having said that not sure if they do USA voltage.


----------



## DJW50

One black mark against the Qutest recently the power plug connector inside the unit came loose and the unit stopped working. I've sent it to Chord so hopefully it will be back soon.


----------



## ctrlm

DJW50 said:


> One black mark against the Qutest recently the power plug connector inside the unit came loose and the unit stopped working. I've sent it to Chord so hopefully it will be back soon.



The same happened to me. My unit is out of warranty and Chord is on the other side of the world so mine is sitting in a cupboard until I figure out what to do.

I have bought a spare micro USB input but it is not an easy soldering job, I was think of taking it to a mobile phone repairer or someone experienced in soldering very small electronics.

The choice of micro USB for the power input is bewildering.


----------



## DJW50

ctrlm said:


> The same happened to me. My unit is out of warranty and Chord is on the other side of the world so mine is sitting in a cupboard until I figure out what to do.
> 
> I have bought a spare micro USB input but it is not an easy soldering job, I was think of taking it to a mobile phone repairer or someone experienced in soldering very small electronics.
> 
> The choice of micro USB for the power input is bewildering.


Sorry to hear that, luckily they are in the next county to me, I did notice when it first arrived that there was a bit of play you could move the plug up and down. I guess you have nothing to loose opening it up and seeing what's loose, as mine is only a few months old it was only right to send it back. It gets worse my new PS Audio Stellar Powerplant 3 has just died on me as well.


----------



## Benno1988

Any DAC in the Qutest price region I should consider? I've owned the Qutest twice before, contemplating going back to it. The Gustard X26 was fine but noisy power, noisy USB and susceptible to RFI. Qutest was always dead silent.


----------



## Nostoi

Benno1988 said:


> Any DAC in the Qutest price region I should consider? I've owned the Qutest twice before, contemplating going back to it. The Gustard X26 was fine but noisy power, noisy USB and susceptible to RFI. Qutest was always dead silent.


Can't think of anything personally. I had the TT2 for quite a while, and personally find the Qutest paired with a decent amp with excellent synergy, outperforms the TT2. Certainly to me ears, anyway. Probably you'd have to go to Dave levels to make any upgrade worth it. 

I have recently installed an Sbooster MKii/ULTRA LPS into my Qutest with a decent power cable and am basically very happy with the performance. I love the simplicity of the Qutest, you leave it on, it does its job. As you say, dead silent, no USB issues, no bugs. I only wish it had another set of RCA inputs so I could run two amps from it.


----------



## DJW50

I agree with the comments above, it's simple and does a good job. I will when I've saved up enough money get a DAVE on loan/trial to see how much better it is. For the record I have been trying 6 other DAC's over the last few months some over 6 times the cost of the Qutest and all have gone back for a refund.
I have bought a MCRU Ultimate LPS to run the Qutest as well as a PS Audio Powerplant 3 regenerator.


----------



## LegionofDoom

I am leaning towards buying a Plixir BDC 2amp power supply as an upgrade to my Qutest’s wall wart.   Any fresh perspectives from BDC owners whom have had time with the Plixir product in their set-up?   Worthy addition to your chain?


----------



## Atriya

Reactcore said:


> Hi ppl.
> Recently joined the Qutest team!
> Acquired myself one used for 1025 euros.
> And tried feeding my HD800 straight out using digital volume in foobar. Have A-B with Mojo. And i can confirm that the analog stage of Qutest is more than capable of driving a 300ohm load.
> ...


Could a setup like this possibly work for an Arya SE?


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> Could a setup like this possibly work for an Arya SE?


It should work ok as i drove my 16ohm earbuds too. But the higher impedance HP the better.

The Arya is 32ohm so set Qutest to 1v


----------



## Atriya

Reactcore said:


> It should work ok as i drove my 16ohm earbuds too. But the higher impedance HP the better.
> 
> The Arya is 32ohm so set Qutest to 1v


Interesting! I'm going to try this ASAP with software volume control from the source, but I wonder how you'd describe the sound compared to using an amp. I feel like I'm missing something, otherwise no one would buy amps anymore!

Also, did you just use two RCA to 3.5mm cables?


----------



## Reactcore

It gives a more transparent sound.
The only reason is that this way the signal passes through less circuit.

I terminated a HP cable with 2 RCA plugs to minimise contacts in the chain


----------



## MWeston

Hey all.  I was wondering how/if people are able to use their Qutest at 705/768KHz while running in Windows.  The driver I use is Chord's official driver and it won't go above 352/384KHz and it also locks everything to that.  It doesn't matter if I use Foobar or Audacious or maybe anything else.  It means that most of my stuff will be over sampled or my hi res stuff gets down sampled to 44.1Khz with the bulk of my collection, depending on which setting I choose.

I don't see anything I can tick to give the apps control of sample rate.  It seems locked by the driver in one configuration.  How do my fellow Windows users deal with this?  I'm starting to wonder if I need to buy a network streamer just to listen to stuff at its native rate.

Thanks!


----------



## technobear

MWeston said:


> Hey all.  I was wondering how/if people are able to use their Qutest at 705/768KHz while running in Windows.  The driver I use is Chord's official driver and it won't go above 352/384KHz and it also locks everything to that.  It doesn't matter if I use Foobar or Audacious or maybe anything else.  It means that most of my stuff will be over sampled or my hi res stuff gets down sampled to 44.1Khz with the bulk of my collection, depending on which setting I choose.
> 
> I don't see anything I can tick to give the apps control of sample rate.  It seems locked by the driver in one configuration.  How do my fellow Windows users deal with this?  I'm starting to wonder if I need to buy a network streamer just to listen to stuff at its native rate.
> 
> Thanks!


Use ASIO.

Foobar2000->Preferences->Playback->Output->ASIO: ASIO Chord 1.05


----------



## MWeston

technobear said:


> Use ASIO.
> 
> Foobar2000->Preferences->Playback->Output->ASIO: ASIO Chord 1.05


Thank you so much for the help!  There was no ASIO driver but there was a Chord exclusive version to select and so I chose that one.  The window started changing colors as I tried different tracks.  I guess that solves that one!  Now my only complaint is that all those higher rates are just purple, slightly less purple, or even slightly less purple.


----------



## Atriya (Jul 19, 2022)

Reactcore said:


> It gives a more transparent sound.
> The only reason is that this way the signal passes through less circuit.
> 
> I terminated a HP cable with 2 RCA plugs to minimise contacts in the chain



Well, I tried it with the Arya SE, and it works for all 3 voltage levels of the Qutest. In fact, there is not that much difference in maximum volume going from 1V to 2V to 3V. Only about a 10-15% increase with each additional V, I would say. I have yet to compare the sound qualitatively vs. my Burson Soloist 3XP amp.

Is there a technical reason why using 1V is better than 2 or 3V, given the 32 ohm impedance of the Arya?

I'm powering the Qutest with a 5V/3A linear power supply.


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> Is there a technical reason why using 1V is better than 2 or 3V, given the 32 ohm impedance of the Arya?
> 
> I'm powering the Qutest with a 5V/3A linear power supply.


Double voltage dont give double volume.. its logarythmic in dB(A).

With 1v you get a more fine volume adjust range, and its less easy to overload Qutest internal voltage regulator by playing too loud


----------



## technobear

Even with a 600 ohm headphone, 1V is way beyond normal listening levels.


----------



## Atriya (Jul 20, 2022)

technobear said:


> Even with a 600 ohm headphone, 1V is way beyond normal listening levels.


Really??? I listened to a track with the Qutest set to 1V output, directly connected to an Arya SE (32 ohms, 94db sensitivity), and with absolutely no software attenuation (i.e. 0 db set in HQPlayer), the loudness was only about medium-high. I could have tolerated more loudness without hurting my ears. Certainly on classical tracks or PCM that has been converted from DSD, I will _need _2V to reach my usual listening loudness.

And also, I'm very happy with the results! The sound doesn't seem at all any worse than using my amplifier (Burson Soloist 3XP) in terms of bass or soundstage like I'd feared, and does seem wonderfully transparent. All this leaves me quite confused because if I'd known this earlier, I simply would not have bought a headphone amplifier, and now I'm left wondering why anyone who has a Qutest to use with headphones buys an amplifier at all. I wonder if @Rob Watts has ever commented on the "direct drive" use of the Qutest.


----------



## technobear

Atriya said:


> Really??? I listened to a track with the Qutest set to 1V output, directly connected to an Arya SE (32 ohms, 94db sensitivity), and with absolutely no software attenuation (i.e. 0 db set in HQPlayer), the loudness was only about medium-high. I could have tolerated more loudness without hurting my ears. Certainly on classical tracks or PCM that has been converted from DSD, I will _need _2V to reach my usual listening loudness.


Your hitting 109dB there. I wouldn't do it for too long. You only think you aren't hurting your ears.


----------



## Atriya

technobear said:


> Your hitting 109dB there. I wouldn't do it for too long. You only think you aren't hurting your ears.


Point taken, and thanks. I do only listen to music in short spurts, but yes, I should be more careful.


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> Point taken, and thanks. I do only listen to music in short spurts, but yes, I should be more careful.


It because theres so few distortion you dont notice its loud..
The brain uses distortion to signal loudness


----------



## Jetblack08

piakoB said:


> Is this the one?
> https://www.mcru.co.uk/product/mcru-ultimate-linear-power-supply-for-chord-qutest-dac/
> I'm wondering if they ship to the US.


Currently waiting on my unit. Should have it by 7/26/2022.


----------



## Atriya (Jul 26, 2022)

uzi2 said:


> I've got mine set at 3V for running direct to planar headphones. The digital volume control in HQPlayer works very well with comfortable listening generally in the range of -15 to -20db depending on the source.



I'm doing exactly this.

May I ask why you're using the 3V output with -15 to -20db attenuation, instead of the 1V output with far less attenuation?


----------



## chelseafc

Any suggestions on a good headphone amp under $1k to pair with the Qutest?

I have a pair of highly sensitive Focal Clear MGs.

I should be getting Topping A90 discreet this week, but I did not like their D90LE DAC due to its pronounced digital sound signature.

This is why I am already pessimistic on A90, but could be proved wrong, of course.


----------



## Atriya

chelseafc said:


> Any suggestions on a good headphone amp under $1k to pair with the Qutest?
> 
> I have a pair of highly sensitive Focal Clear MGs.
> 
> ...



I have an A90 (the original version) and did not like it with the Q. Very detailed, but harsh and flat sound. Moving to the Burson Soloist 3XP - which can be had in your budget I think - was a big step up. The most noticeable impacts were the much more 3D soundstage, and the smoother treble.


----------



## trollchu

I didn't know the Qutest was able to change it's output voltage until looking at a product manual last night, I have one on the way already, what's the incentive of changing the output voltage of a DAC and what would be the function's most practical use? Does changing the voltage setting cause it to resolve any differently?


----------



## Atriya

trollchu said:


> I didn't know the Qutest was able to change it's output voltage until looking at a product manual last night, I have one on the way already, what's the incentive of changing the output voltage of a DAC and what would be the function's most practical use? Does changing the voltage setting cause it to resolve any differently?


It is intended for amplifier matching. The designer has explained that there are no audible differences between settings except those due to the paired gear.


----------



## trollchu

Atriya said:


> It is intended for amplifier matching. The designer has explained that there are no audible differences between settings except those due to the paired gear.


If that's the case, what type of situation would determine whether to set it to 1V, 2V, or 3V?


----------



## Atriya

trollchu said:


> If that's the case, what type of situation would determine whether to set it to 1V, 2V, or 3V?


Some amps don't reach full power at 1V, and some amps clip at 3V. 2V is very standard and should suit most amps. On the other hand, if your amp is fine with 3V, you will get a bit more volume out of the setting to that.


----------



## Triode User

trollchu said:


> If that's the case, what type of situation would determine whether to set it to 1V, 2V, or 3V?


Try each different voltage output and select the one which gives the most useful volume range on your amplifier. I selected the one which gave me my usual listening level at about 40% of the volume adjustment on the amplifier. But try for yourself and just select what works for you.


----------



## trollchu

Thank you both, I'll play around with that when it arrives. If I'm understanding correctly, I should be viewing it as if I'm adjusting the gain level from the DAC, but with questionably large jumps between intervals, correct?


----------



## elira

trollchu said:


> Thank you both, I'll play around with that when it arrives. If I'm understanding correctly, I should be viewing it as if I'm adjusting the gain level from the DAC, but with questionably large jumps between intervals, correct?


You just set the one that works best for you when you set up the system. It's not designed to be changed frequently.


----------



## miketlse

trollchu said:


> Thank you both, I'll play around with that when it arrives. If I'm understanding correctly, I should be viewing it as if I'm adjusting the gain level from the DAC, but with questionably large jumps between intervals, correct?


Just to add to what everyone else has posted - 2V became a semi-official standard once CD players were released in the 1980s. Since then some valve amps are happy with 3V+, but some do like only 1V.
The Qutest does allow the owner to experiment with a 'trial and error approach' until they find the best output level for their own amp/system.
Please experiment, and post your return on experience, to help other undecided Qutest owners.


----------



## trollchu

miketlse said:


> Just to add to what everyone else has posted - 2V became a semi-official standard once CD players were released in the 1980s. Since then some valve amps are happy with 3V+, but some do like only 1V.
> The Qutest does allow the owner to experiment with a 'trial and error approach' until they find the best output level for their own amp/system.
> Please experiment, and post your return on experience, to help other undecided Qutest owners.


If 2V is a common standard for CD players, I would not be surprised if that's what I settle on, but sure, sounds amusing. The Qutest will be the last of four DAC fed into my chain by a VS-4X, so I'll test it on each of my amps individually and take notes. I own a CTH, an MZ2, a THR-1, and outside the chain, a Burson Lycan.


----------



## miketlse

trollchu said:


> If 2V is a common standard for CD players, I would not be surprised if that's what I settle on, but sure, sounds amusing. The Qutest will be the last of four DAC fed into my chain by a VS-4X, so I'll test it on each of my amps individually and take notes. I own a CTH, an MZ2, a THR-1, and outside the chain, a Burson Lycan.


That is the correct approach. You do see posts from owners complaining that the set the Qutest to 3V, and then don't like the resulting sound signature (because of clipping).
Half an hour of trial and error can quickly prevent other downstream issues/complaints.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

miketlse said:


> That is the correct approach. You do see posts from owners complaining that the set the Qutest to 3V, and then don't like the resulting sound signature (because of clipping).
> Half an hour of trial and error can quickly prevent other downstream issues/complaints.



Prior to having the M Scaler the Qutest sounded better to me on my system in 2 volts.  After getting the M Scaler, 3 volts sounds better to me.   I guess it may be because the M Scaler lowers the volume by 3db in order not to clip the digital signal as it oversamples.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

I am also noticing the warm filter in the Qutest is more pronounced with the M Scaler, I am not sure what is going on but with the M Scaler in place in my system the warm filter sounds much more natural than the other filters.  Crazy.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

@Rob Watts   When the M Scaler is connected to the Qutest and the Warm filter is selected my understanding is that we are bypassing the  WTA 256FS and the WTA 1 of the M Scaler overrides the WTA 1 of the Qutest, what about the 1024 upsampling that happens in the Qutest, is that bypassed as well?


----------



## Rob Watts

GuiltyRocker said:


> @Rob Watts   When the M Scaler is connected to the Qutest and the Warm filter is selected my understanding is that we are bypassing the  WTA 256FS and the WTA 1 of the M Scaler overrides the WTA 1 of the Qutest, what about the 1024 upsampling that happens in the Qutest, is that bypassed as well?


Correct - orange or red filters bypass the WTA2 filter (16FS input to 256FS output), and the 256FS to 2048FS filters become 16FS to 2048FS. Apart from accepting 16FS rather than 256FS, these filters are identical to when the WTA2 is used (white and green), so they are definitely not bypassed - that would ruin the performance. The difference between white to green and orange to red is just the time constant of these filters - green/orange removes more HF noise and distortion above 50kHz.


----------



## TheMiddleSky (Aug 2, 2022)

chelseafc said:


> Any suggestions on a good headphone amp under $1k to pair with the Qutest?
> 
> I have a pair of highly sensitive Focal Clear MGs.
> 
> ...



A90D is quite different compare to A90. Yes both try to strike neutrality, kind of dry and raw. However A90D "pronounce" warmer character, more rounded notes, more weight for each notes. Treble has more polite bite while remain the neutrality. Soundstage depth definitely improve from A90.

Singxer SA-1, as the same discrete topology with also superb measurement, deliver warmer presentation than A90, but, not quite as warm as A90D. I prefer Singxer for better transparency, micro detail, and even more spacious soundstage than A90D. I prefer A90D for warmer and fuller body, with a little drier notes.

I prefer Soloist 3XP compared to these 3 excellent measured amps though, albeit with higher price tag as well.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

Rob Watts said:


> Correct - orange or red filters bypass the WTA2 filter (16FS input to 256FS output), and the 256FS to 2048FS filters become 16FS to 2048FS. Apart from accepting 16FS rather than 256FS, these filters are identical to when the WTA2 is used (white and green), so they are definitely not bypassed - that would ruin the performance. The difference between white to green and orange to red is just the time constant of these filters - green/orange removes more HF noise and distortion above 50kHz.



Thanks Rob.  I definitely hear a stronger effect of the warm filter with the M Scaler on.


----------



## elira

chelseafc said:


> Any suggestions on a good headphone amp under $1k to pair with the Qutest?
> 
> I have a pair of highly sensitive Focal Clear MGs.
> 
> ...


The Gilmore Lite mk2 is a nice amp.


----------



## Nostoi

chelseafc said:


> Any suggestions on a good headphone amp under $1k to pair with the Qutest?
> 
> I have a pair of highly sensitive Focal Clear MGs.
> 
> ...


The original Rupert Never amp is within your budget; that's a nice little amp that would likely pair well with Qutest: https://www.thomann.de/at/rupert_ne...Wm_JeQBRXkIF03gfkHhd6YuZeJR-HdEhoCyQMQAvD_BwE


----------



## Reactcore

chelseafc said:


> Any suggestions on a good headphone amp under $1k to pair with the Qutest?
> 
> I have a pair of highly sensitive Focal Clear MGs.
> 
> ...



You could try a Questyle CMA 600i..

Its specially good for chord DAC's cause it uses single ended input but makes out a full balanced AMP stage.

If youre handy you might can modify a CMA400i like i did. See my signature
It has stunning result


----------



## flaxton

I am using the Qutest with a Leema cd. Which colour is best to use with a cd. I have tried white and green so far but don’t notice much difference. Thanks.


----------



## ZzZzZzZ

Is it a good decision to buy Chord Qutest now as it's already in market since last 5 years ?


----------



## Nostoi

ZzZzZzZ said:


> Is it a good decision to buy Chord Qutest now as it's already in market since last 5 years ?


No, it suddenly passed its expiry date and no longer sounds good, I'm afraid. As is widely known, DAC sound quality has a 1 to 2 month lifespan. After that, the sound tends to decay.


----------



## Quince

Nostoi said:


> No, it suddenly passed its expiry date and no longer sounds good, I'm afraid. As is widely known, DAC sound quality has a 1 to 2 month lifespan. After that, the sound tends to decay.


Totally, mine even smells a bit rancid.


----------



## Nostoi

Quince said:


> Totally, mine even smells a bit rancid.


This can often be the case if the DAC is not stored safely in a fridge when not in use. Please remember to practice good DAC hygiene from hereon. 

*Disclaimer: do not store your DAC in a fridge*


----------



## technobear

Or to put it another way...

The Qutest is still the best DAC you can buy at that price point and there isn't a new model in the works anytime soon.


----------



## DJW50

technobear said:


> Or to put it another way...
> 
> The Qutest is still the best DAC you can buy at that price point and there isn't a new model in the works anytime soon.


I agree and I have tried other DAC's some nearly six times the price of the Qutest and all have gone back for a refund. I'm saving up for a DAVE as it seems the only replacement for the Qutest.


----------



## Nostoi

DJW50 said:


> I agree and I have tried other DAC's some nearly six times the price of the Qutest and all have gone back for a refund. I'm saving up for a DAVE as it seems the only replacement for the Qutest.


Also agreed. I had the Qutest once sold it before buying more expensive DACs (including TT2) and then returned to Qutest. DAVE would probably be the only DAC I replaced it with (notwithstanding the recent kerfuffle), even though I expect the improvement to be incremental. In terms of price-performance ratio, Qutest hits the mark.


----------



## ZzZzZzZ

Thank you for your guidance guys !! Instantly ordered Chord Qutest with Allo Shanti psu.


----------



## Triode User

ZzZzZzZ said:


> Thank you for your guidance guys !! Instantly ordered Chord Qutest with Allo Shanti psu.


The Allo Shanti is a great psu in my opinion and having tested it with my Qutest but I think it is let down by its not great factory dc output leads. For my friend I took his Allo Shanti apart and installed some better quality and shorter leads and the sound of the Qutest improved considerably. It is a faff to take apart but if nothing else I would suggest shortening the factory dc output leads by perhaps a half.


----------



## jester115

Do the BNC to Coax adapters degrade sound quality at all? I’m curious to try the Qutest in the future but the lack of a digital coax input was always an issue for me. Would the optical input be better than using a BNC/Coax adapter? Source is a Node 2i. Thanks!


----------



## elira

jester115 said:


> Do the BNC to Coax adapters degrade sound quality at all? I’m curious to try the Qutest in the future but the lack of a digital coax input was always an issue for me. Would the optical input be better than using a BNC/Coax adapter? Source is a Node 2i. Thanks!


You can also buy a cable with BNC on one side and RCA on the other to avoid the adapter.


----------



## Triode User (Aug 4, 2022)

jester115 said:


> Do the BNC to Coax adapters degrade sound quality at all? I’m curious to try the Qutest in the future but the lack of a digital coax input was always an issue for me. Would the optical input be better than using a BNC/Coax adapter? Source is a Node 2i. Thanks!


The connection with the adapters can be a bit dodgy and also they sometimes start seeming as if they are ok and then the connection often seems to degrade over time. As has been suggested, most cable firms make cables with BNC one end and RCA the other and that is by far a better solution rather than using an adapter.

PS, I used the Node2i RCA out and then BNC into a Qutest and it sounded very good. If you are tempted it is also a great upgrade to install one of the power interface boards in the 2i so that you can use a LPS (Allo Shanti etc) for the 2i.


----------



## jester115

Triode User said:


> The connection with the adapters can be a bit dodgy and also they sometimes start seeming as if they are ok and then the connection often seems to degrade over time. As has been suggested, most cable firms make cables with BNC one end and RCA the other and that is by far a better solution rather than using an adapter.
> 
> PS, I used the Node2i RCA out and then BNC into a Qutest and it sounded very good. If you are tempted it is also a great upgrade to install one of the power interface boards in the 2i so that you can use a LPS (Allo Shanti etc) for the 2i.


Good to know. How has the LPS improved the sound of the Node? I’ve got a Cullen power cable that I’ve had for a while and been happy with  it always looking at ways to improve things


----------



## Quince

For about two years, I used a Nordost Blue Heaven with adapters on the Qtest side very happily. I didn’t perceive any degradation.


----------



## Triode User

jester115 said:


> Good to know. How has the LPS improved the sound of the Node? I’ve got a Cullen power cable that I’ve had for a while and been happy with  it always looking at ways to improve things


I used the interface board made in Poland. That with the LPS made the Nide sound smoother. Everyone who has gone that route has been pleased.


----------



## George Hincapie (Aug 27, 2022)

technobear said:


> Or to put it another way...
> 
> The Qutest is still the best DAC you can buy at that price point and there isn't a new model in the works anytime soon.


Is that a joke? Several DACs I have auditioned are better at that price point. The Qutest is a good DAC, but crazy claims are not helpful.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

George Hincapie said:


> Is that a joke? Several DACs I have auditioned are better at that price point. The Qutest is a good DAC, but crazy claims are not helpful.


Oh, which DACs are those?  And please don't tell me the Topping D90SE, don't make me laugh.   Do tell me which DACs are those.


----------



## Jetblack08

I was considering getting a Dave but since I started playing 24bit 192kHz music through the Qutest I am no longer in a hurry. Perhaps an M scaler and call it a day.


----------



## Womaz

In December last year I got a new Niimbus US5 Pro amp and I could not decide on a DAC.
I was considering the Qutest, the Sonnet Morpheus and the Denafrips Pontus2.
I decided to go for the cheapest option at first and then maybe upgrade, so that was the Qutest.#The biggest compliment I can pay it is that I do not have that urge to change it. The set up sounds excellent.


----------



## DJW50 (Aug 28, 2022)

Jetblack08 said:


> I was considering getting a Dave but since I started playing 24bit 192kHz music through the Qutest I am no longer in a hurry. Perhaps an M scaler and call it a day.


Me too, since buying a decent LPS for my Qutest I'm in no hurry to buy a DAVE although I will in about 12 months time.
My Auralic Aries G1 upscales to 384kHz 32 bit and it sounds wonderful
I've also decided to give the M Scaler a miss too because of the need to buy very expensive interconnects to do it justice.
As the Qutest is just a DAC I guess all the money has gone into it's one purpose so when I connect it to my Pathos Inpol Ear and then into my Focal Utopia's it sounds wonderful, so I'm looking forward to trying the DAVE to see how much better it sounds in my system as I'm very happy at the moment.

For the record I have tried quite a few other DAC's and have kept the Qutest. I have tried DAC's that are 6 times the cost of the Qutest including the PS Audio DAC etc.  I have been able to call the HiFi dealer and arrange to try each DAC, it does mean I have to pay full retail for it but it enables me to try it for a few days. As I have said everyone has gone back.


----------



## Nostoi

Womaz said:


> In December last year I got a new Niimbus US5 Pro amp and I could not decide on a DAC.
> I was considering the Qutest, the Sonnet Morpheus and the Denafrips Pontus2.
> I decided to go for the cheapest option at first and then maybe upgrade, so that was the Qutest.#The biggest compliment I can pay it is that I do not have that urge to change it. The set up sounds excellent.


I've had the Morpheus before, and I will say the Qutest is far more resolving and engaging. The Morpheus is a very laid back (boring) DAC.


----------



## Nostoi

George Hincapie said:


> Is that a joke? Several DACs I have auditioned are better at that price point. The Qutest is a good DAC, but crazy claims are not helpful.


Give examples, otherwise this is just hyperbolic clickbait.


----------



## miketlse

George Hincapie said:


> Is that a joke? Several DACs I have auditioned are better at that price point. The Qutest is a good DAC, but crazy claims are not helpful.


The original question was 'Is it a good decision to buy Chord Qutest now as it's already in market since last 5 years ?'.

Why not try and help the guy understand what you mean by 'crazy claims', by providing more context?
For instance a radar graph for each of the DACs you auditioned, and how they compared against various criteria.
Note - I put dummy data in this table, so the graph is illustrative and not definitive. (6 is intended to represent 'very good' and 1 to represent 'very bad'.


----------



## George Hincapie

miketlse said:


> The original question was 'Is it a good decision to buy Chord Qutest now as it's already in market since last 5 years ?'.
> 
> Why not try and help the guy understand what you mean by 'crazy claims', by providing more context?
> For instance a radar graph for each of the DACs you auditioned, and how they compared against various criteria.
> Note - I put dummy data in this table, so the graph is illustrative and not definitive. (6 is intended to represent 'very good' and 1 to represent 'very bad'.


I like that approach. That isn't how I form a view, but I can see the value in it.

I would have thought my 'crazy claims' meaning was obvious, but perhaps I could equally have said "I disagree with you. The World has moved on and there are more compelling choices at that price point".

I like the Qutest. I was very close to buying one after a home audition, but ultimately chose to go in a different direction.


----------



## johnnym

George Hincapie said:


> I like the Qutest. I was very close to buying one after a home audition, but ultimately chose to go in a different direction.


Which direction?


----------



## Chop-Top

George Hincapie said:


> Several DACs I have auditioned are better at that price point.


I would also like to this this list of several DACs


----------



## Womaz

George Hincapie said:


> I like that approach. That isn't how I form a view, but I can see the value in it.
> 
> I would have thought my 'crazy claims' meaning was obvious, but perhaps I could equally have said "I disagree with you. The World has moved on and there are more compelling choices at that price point".
> 
> I like the Qutest. I was very close to buying one after a home audition, but ultimately chose to go in a different direction.


I am interested to hear what DACs at the same price point you would say are better?
Genuinelly interested ....not just looking for a fight


----------



## George Hincapie

johnnym said:


> Which direction?


Metrum Acoustics.


----------



## George Hincapie

Womaz said:


> I am interested to hear what DACs at the same price point you would say are better?
> Genuinelly interested ....not just looking for a fight



In that spirit then, I prefer the presentation of the RME ADI2 with AKM, or the Denafrips Ares II with Iris DDC (heard this recently - excellent).

I am currently using a Metrum Acoustics Musette with DAC2 modules in my headphone system. No longer available, but essentially it's an Onyx with one NOS module per channel rather than two.

In the middle of a significant upgrade to my headphone system at the moment. Replacing my current amp with an LTA MZ3 and replacing the DAC with either a Schiit Yggdrassil LiM, or a Denfrips Pontus with Hermes DDC. Go back and forth with that choice (mostly because no returns for Denafrips, so if it isn't for me I am stuck), but I'll settle on one purchase soon. Leaning toward the Yggy currently; owner feedback of thd LiM variant is superb.

I would like to audition the Hugo TT2 with the MZ3 when it arrives. The detail of the TT2 may work well with tube HPA and there could be a good synergy there, but it's £2K more than the £2500 budget I've set myself for the DAC.

Hope this helps.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

George Hincapie said:


> In that spirit then, I prefer the presentation of the RME ADI2 with AKM, or the Denafrips Ares II with Iris DDC (heard this recently - excellent).
> 
> I am currently using a Metrum Acoustics Musette with DAC2 modules in my headphone system. No longer available, but essentially it's an Onyx with one NOS module per channel rather than two.
> 
> ...


I listened to the RME, i did not like it at all, to me it sounded flat, I also found it life-less, but that's just me.  I haven't listened to those other DACs you mention, but I also listened to the top TEAC DAC, which was based on AKM and also didn't like it.  I have a Sabre-based Oppo BDP105 and after getting the Chord I find it Bright and thin, don't like it anymore.  I guess I am a Chord man.


----------



## JayDM

Can only really see the RME as a contender if you really squeeze absolutely every ounce of value out of the features.  I picked one up and wanted to love it so desperately, however it just didn’t do it for me.  As just a DAC it sounded… alright I guess.  The sound just didn’t gel with me for some reason.  I can’t put it down to any real issue with the product, it’s obviously well made and there are ALOT of features, but preferring to EQ in software and not being in love with it as a plug and play DAC it just wasn’t for me.

Picked up an iFi, Ares ii, and am in the market for a Qutest which I hope will be a winner.


----------



## Nostoi

GuiltyRocker said:


> I listened to the RME, i did not like it at all, to me it sounded flat, I also found it life-less, but that's just me.  I haven't listened to those other DACs you mention, but I also listened to the top TEAC DAC, which was based on AKM and also didn't like it.  I have a Sabre-based Oppo BDP105 and after getting the Chord I find it Bright and thin, don't like it anymore.  I guess I am a Chord man.


Totally agree. RME has some good DSP features and the LCD display is a nice touch, but overall presentation is very dry with a slightly metallic touch. Amp section has clean power but lacks dynamics. Build quality also left much to be desired.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

JayDM said:


> Can only really see the RME as a contender if you really squeeze absolutely every ounce of value out of the features.  I picked one up and wanted to love it so desperately, however it just didn’t do it for me.  As just a DAC it sounded… alright I guess.  The sound just didn’t gel with me for some reason.  I can’t put it down to any real issue with the product, it’s obviously well made and there are ALOT of features, but preferring to EQ in software and not being in love with it as a plug and play DAC it just wasn’t for me.
> 
> Picked up an iFi, Ares ii, and am in the market for a Qutest which I hope will be a winner.


I heard it twice, to me it sounded lifeless and flat as a pancake, did not like it at all.  It has a very digital sound to it, not for me.


----------



## JayDM

Just got my Qutest in and I’m having some problems with the drivers and settings.  Hoping I can get some feedback on this as I’m usually pretty tech savvy and can figure out where my problem is.  

So, received the Qutest perhaps an hour ago, plugged everything in, set it up, downloaded drivers and went to the settings of  Audirvana to make sure everything was correct and my ASIO drivers do not seem to be showing up correctly.  Using windows 11 btw.  Originally the device wasn’t showing up in ASIO at all however I needed to finish the install, after I did that the ASIO Chord 1.05 shows up in my output device options, however many of the PCM and DSD frequencies are greyed out and I am not able to actually open up the driver when I click on the little settings wheel next to the “ASIO” option.  No issues with sound and it seems to switch sample rates however I do not have all of my available options which bugs me.  WASAPI also seems to be showing up fineDoes anyone have a suggestion?  

The only issue I can possibly see being a problem is also having iFi drivers installed, but I cannot see that truly being the problem, I can’t be the only person who wishes to be able to switch back and fourth between hardware without having to uninstall and reinstall software every time I do switch… if that is the problem I’ll be quite disappointed. 

Including some images in case I wasn’t clear in explanation.


----------



## Fugue

I recently replaced a laptop with a Roon Nucleus Plus streamer--wow! With the nasty electronic artifacts from my computer gone, I can finally hear my Qutest in all of its glory! Overall, the sound is less "digital" and more realistic.


----------



## JoinDivision

technobear said:


> QED Reference Quartz


Hi technobear (great name btw) - I received one of these cables yesterday to bridge from a NODE to the Qutest, but I can only get it to transmit up to 24/96, 24/192 is silent. Can you suggest something I might be doing wrong?


----------



## JoinDivision

Further to that, QED noted that on the features page of the website it says the optical input is only up to 24/96, but in the Qutest manual it says the optical input is up to 24/192. Does anyone know which one is right?

What's unusual is that I can use a cheapo Profigold plastic cable and 24/192 works just fine.


----------



## technobear

JoinDivision said:


> Further to that, QED noted that on the features page of the website it says the optical input is only up to 24/96, but in the Qutest manual it says the optical input is up to 24/192. Does anyone know which one is right?
> 
> What's unusual is that I can use a cheapo Profigold plastic cable and 24/192 works just fine.


TOSLink is only guaranteed to work up to 176.4 but can often (usually even) work perfectly well at 192.

Personally I don't have any 192 files to try with. I assume that you do. If you're upsampling, the advice for Qutest is *don't*.

As for the QED, are the plugs fully inserted and not being skewed?


----------



## JoinDivision

JayDM said:


> Just got my Qutest in and I’m having some problems with the drivers and settings.  Hoping I can get some feedback on this as I’m usually pretty tech savvy and can figure out where my problem is.
> 
> So, received the Qutest perhaps an hour ago, plugged everything in, set it up, downloaded drivers and went to the settings of  Audirvana to make sure everything was correct and my ASIO drivers do not seem to be showing up correctly.  Using windows 11 btw.  Originally the device wasn’t showing up in ASIO at all however I needed to finish the install, after I did that the ASIO Chord 1.05 shows up in my output device options, however many of the PCM and DSD frequencies are greyed out and I am not able to actually open up the driver when I click on the little settings wheel next to the “ASIO” option.  No issues with sound and it seems to switch sample rates however I do not have all of my available options which bugs me.  WASAPI also seems to be showing up fineDoes anyone have a suggestion?
> 
> ...


Hi Jay, if you go to the Chord website you can download the driver from there. I think it's a modified Asio driver and when it's installed you should see your Qutest as 'KS Chord Streaming' (kernel streaming).


----------



## JoinDivision

technobear said:


> TOSLink is only guaranteed to work up to 176.4 but can often (usually even) work perfectly well at 192.
> 
> Personally I don't have any 192 files to try with. I assume that you do. If you're upsampling, the advice for Qutest is *don't*.
> 
> As for the QED, are the plugs fully inserted and not being skewed?


Thanks Technobear. Yes I've been getting a bit of a crash-course in Toslink etc!

Definitely wouldn't dream of upsampling, it's a straight digital pass-through.

The QED plugs are clicking when inserted and are positioned correctly, I even tried plugging in the other way around (as if that would make a difference, but worth a try right).

In terms of pure bandwidth the QEQ should be very capable of the full 24/192. I think I read that would be about 10mbps, whereas the QED is rated over 15mbps (numbers might not be exactly right).

I did also read somewhere that the filament core when using glass in a cable is much narrower diameter than plastic, which might affect the beam dispersal hitting the sensor at the other end.

I'm a bit stuck at the moment though, I don't feel I could return the cable if it is the case that the Qutest isn't officially rated for 24/192 over optical, even if the Profigold cable works at that bandwidth and presumably other users with other cables are not experiencing this issue.


----------



## JoinDivision

And something weird is that the light coming out of the Bluesound optical out is red colour and the light coming out of the Qutest optical input is green colour. Not sure if relevant at all.


----------



## JoinDivision

Right, panic over everyone - Technobear was right and the cable just wasn't pushed in hard enough. I just went back to the Profigold cable and I had a 24/192 signal coming from the streamer as I was doing it. I really looked up close as I was doing it, and thanks to the Qutest having a window with a coloured light in it, I could see by gently wiggling the cable the colour was changing from red (16/44) to blue (24/192). So I put the QED cable in again and did same thing and got the colour to change. The cable was clicking into place but still wasn't quite aligned fully and just needs some extra encouragement. Hope this is useful in case anyone experiences the day problem. Now I have to go back to QED technical support with my tail between my legs.

PS: Chord can update the features page on their website so the optical output spec says 24/192 with my personal seal of approval!


----------



## Atriya (Sep 17, 2022)

Is the consensus among Qutest users that because of the jitter-resistance of Chord DACs, there is *no* benefit to using a USB-reclocker (e.g. Innuous Phoenix) in the source chain, except for the noise-reduction benefits?

I'm thinking about such a device placed prior to the USB-to-SPDIF DDC that I already use. But if reclocking has no benefit because it's only benefit is related to jitter reduction, I will skip it.

By extension, it would also seem to imply that a better source/streamer (USB) would not make any difference (beyond the noise issue). I currently use a Raspberry Pi 4. If I upgraded to something like an UltraRendu, what value would it add beyond a lower-jitter lower-noise signal? And if the Qutest is jitter-proof, I can control the noise by other means (e.g. an Intona Isolator) after the RPi4.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

Atriya said:


> Is the consensus among Qutest users that because of the jitter-resistance of Chord DACs, there is *no* benefit to using a USB-reclocker (e.g. Innuous Phoenix) in the source chain, except for the noise-reduction benefits?
> 
> I'm thinking about such a device placed prior to the USB-to-SPDIF DDC that I already use. But if reclocking has no benefit because it's only benefit is related to jitter reduction, I will skip it.
> 
> By extension, it would also seem to imply that a better source/streamer (USB) would not make any difference (beyond the noise issue). I currently use a Raspberry Pi 4. If I upgraded to something like an UltraRendu, what value would it add beyond a lower-jitter lower-noise signal? And if the Qutest is jitter-proof, I can control the noise by other means (e.g. an Intona Isolator) after the RPi4.


If you look at the jitter performance of the Qutest, it is well under -140-150db, i say there is no need for any of that as that is incredible jitter reduction performance.  Save your money for something else.


----------



## Jetblack08

I was really burning to get the Dave but I may stick with the Qutest. Playing music in Hi-Rez is where the magic is.


----------



## GuiltyRocker

Jetblack08 said:


> I was really burning to get the Dave but I may stick with the Qutest. Playing music in Hi-Rez is where the magic is.


The DAVE is amazing, i demoed them all and chose Qutest with M Scaler.


----------



## OCC7N

ra990 said:


> Got this one recently, works really well with the MScaler, fits nicely and is a glass cable that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Works fine all the way up to 192k. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001D1A8KM


are you still happy with this cable?


----------



## ra990

OCC7N said:


> are you still happy with this cable?


Yes


----------



## Jetblack08

GuiltyRocker said:


> The DAVE is amazing, i demoed them all and chose Qutest with M Scaler.


I’ve been thinking about getting a M Scaler and calling it a day also…. is there a night & day difference?


----------



## OCC7N

Jetblack08 said:


> I’ve been thinking about getting a M Scaler and calling it a day also…. is there a night & day difference?


get good optical chain with chord and ditch USB.....Im out


----------



## GuiltyRocker

Jetblack08 said:


> I’ve been thinking about getting a M Scaler and calling it a day also…. is there a night & day difference?


Get it, I have zero regrets, I would buy it again and again, one of the best pieces of gear I've ever bought.  It made it all come together, it is so good it made me want to study why it's so good, I read Shannon theory and also digital sampling theory and all.  I now understand interpolation filters, dither, bit length,  noise shapers, PCM and DSD because it made me wonder.  It is that good.


----------



## beardyweirdy

Could any Qutest users please help:

I am using a Qutest with a Beyerdynamic A2 amp and feeding the Qutest with my iPhone (Tidal) via USB.
At the moment I can control the volume on my amp and iPhone. Is there anyway of fixing the volume to amp only?
Thanks


----------



## Garpov

Just leave the iPhone volume at max and adjust on the amp?


----------



## beardyweirdy

I thought that; any idea if 2 sources controlling the sound will have a detrimental effect?


----------



## George Hincapie (Oct 4, 2022)

Ignore


----------



## iulian_sip

Hello,
I would like you to help me with a small problem.
I have a puppy that chewed the micro B USB connector on the power cord from a Farad Super 3 power supply.
I would like to replace this micro USB, unfortunately I don't know how it is pin out.
I have a Qutest and I would like you to tell me the + and GND pin configuration.
Thank you very much.
Iulian


----------



## technobear

iulian_sip said:


> Hello,
> I would like you to help me with a small problem.
> I have a puppy that chewed the micro B USB connector on the power cord from a Farad Super 3 power supply.
> I would like to replace this micro USB, unfortunately I don't know how it is pin out.
> ...


https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=microusb+wiring+diagram


----------



## iulian_sip

technobear said:


> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=microusb+wiring+diagram


Thank you very much.


----------



## KBee (Oct 16, 2022)

I'm using my Qutest DAC mostly with foobar2000 and while I'm finding it to be great, I'm concerned I may not have it configured optimally.

One thing I've noticed is that it's quite slow, a slight lag, when skipping to the next song, or when seeking from one part of a track to another. I'm also unsure on how to best configure some of the settings.

The other thing I've noticed is that the input light never changes from green, whether I'm playing 16-bit 44.1khz music or 24-bit 96khz. Maybe I'm missing something, but I was under the impression the light was supposed to change with sample rate.

I have also occasionally, when going to use audio in another software (e.g. MPC-HC or Spotify) after listening in foobar2000, have been greeted with loud white noise instead of my audio. Opening and closing the software or, on one occasion, having to restart the Qutest has solved this. Not sure what could be causing this.

Here's my settings:

I'm using the ASIO Chord 1.05, I'm guessing the ASIO is the one to go for with the Chord? I've tried WASAPI but I have no idea if that's transparent, it does seek a little bit faster. (Shouldn't things be faster with ASIO?)
Buffer length I've tried at the minimum of 50ms and up to 4000ms with no discernable difference for the most part although very low led to it falling over itself at the start of songs, as I guess is to be expected.
I've tried checking and unchecking "Use 64-bit ASIO drivers" with no discernable difference. My Windows is 64-bit so I have it enabled.
I have real-time process priority enabled.
In Windows settings I'm at 24-bit, 96000hz.
I sometimes feel it's struggling to "keep up" with the music, there's no noticeable skips (except for starting a song if I set the buffer too low) but it's just a feeling I have. This may be a placebo.

I'm not quite as nuanced in the intricacies of the various settings as some of you, so apologies if these are obvious points, but what can I improve upon here? I'm using a decent machine, I do have various other audio drivers installed for various other devices I only occasionally use for different things.


----------



## jbarrentine

Microsoft fixed windows audio subsystem many years ago. To my knowledge people shouldn't have to jump through special hoops for quality audio on windows any longer.


----------



## KBee

One thing I have noticed is that foobar2000 sometimes has a slight stutter when starting a track. It's brief, and seems to only happen when I skip to or double-click a track, presumably it builds up a cache if it triggers organically on a playlist. I don't get that playing a file in VLC, Musicbee or AIMP. The performance does seem to be worse in foobar2000, and I don't know why.

My settings are at the bottom of the previous page in this thread, if anyone can advise.


----------



## technobear

KBee said:


> The other thing I've noticed is that the input light never changes from green, whether I'm playing 16-bit 44.1khz music or 24-bit 96khz. Maybe I'm missing something, but I was under the impression the light was supposed to change with sample rate.


You may think you are using ASIO but you clearly aren't.

Have you installed the ASIO extension foo_out_asio? (Preferences->Components)

Have you selected the Chord ASIO driver as your output device? (Preferences->Playback->Output)


----------



## JoinDivision

KBee said:


> I'm using my Qutest DAC mostly with foobar2000 and while I'm finding it to be great, I'm concerned I may not have it configured optimally.
> 
> One thing I've noticed is that it's quite slow, a slight lag, when skipping to the next song, or when seeking from one part of a track to another. I'm also unsure on how to best configure some of the settings.
> 
> ...


I used foobar for a while and found that you need to use the Chord asio driver from here https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/qutest so first step would be to use that one if you aren't already, which might mean uninstalling the existing asio and installing the Qutest specific one. When in the output menu of foobar the drop down should say 'KS Chord ' I think so you will know you have the right one. I think you also have to allow 'exclusive control ' for that device in windows audio settings so that it can bypass you're windows devices signal processing - if you're at 24/96 in windows and the light is always green it probably means that your windows internal DAC is doing the processing instead of the Qutest as the green light is for that bitrate. You will notice a huge improvement in sound when it's working right. Let me know if that doesn't work and I will boot up my laptop and check for you.


----------



## KBee

technobear said:


> You may think you are using ASIO but you clearly aren't.
> 
> Have you installed the ASIO extension foo_out_asio? (Preferences->Components)
> 
> Have you selected the Chord ASIO driver as your output device? (Preferences->Playback->Output)





JoinDivision said:


> I used foobar for a while and found that you need to use the Chord asio driver from here https://chordelectronics.co.uk/product/qutest so first step would be to use that one if you aren't already, which might mean uninstalling the existing asio and installing the Qutest specific one. When in the output menu of foobar the drop down should say 'KS Chord ' I think so you will know you have the right one. I think you also have to allow 'exclusive control ' for that device in windows audio settings so that it can bypass you're windows devices signal processing - if you're at 24/96 in windows and the light is always green it probably means that your windows internal DAC is doing the processing instead of the Qutest as the green light is for that bitrate. You will notice a huge improvement in sound when it's working right. Let me know if that doesn't work and I will boot up my laptop and check for you.



Thanks, I was looking in the wrong place for the light, it is changing with sample rate, but the less then perfect performance in foobar2000 remains.

Here's my settings, foo_out_asio is also installed:











I have no option for "KS Chord" but as far as I'm aware these settings are correct (buffer length aside, I have no idea what to do with that or if it even makes a difference for ASIO).

It just feels a lot like foobar2000 is struggling to "keep up", and there's a fraction of a second at the start of tracks I skip to that's either missing or glitchy sometimes, almost as if the hardware is struggling to keep up, but VLC/Aimp/Musicbee are all fine when tested so it's a foobar2000 thing.

I've also noticed that high-intensity tasks like scanning ReplayGain can stutter the audio. But this isn't a slow machine and shouldn't have any issues. I'm not sure what to try.


----------



## Jetblack08

Question… are there more than one driver updates for the Qutest or just one? If more than one, could someone post the links to others?


----------



## JoinDivision

KBee said:


> Thanks, I was looking in the wrong place for the light, it is changing with sample rate, but the less then perfect performance in foobar2000 remains.
> 
> Here's my settings, foo_out_asio is also installed:
> 
> ...


Here is a photograph of what mine looks like


----------



## KBee

I don't have that option at all, does this require some sort of additional component? There's no KS audio options, I thought that ASIO would be correct for ASIO audio. I installed, and have reinstalled, the drivers from their website.


----------



## JoinDivision

KBee said:


> I don't have that option at all, does this require some sort of additional component? There's no KS audio options, I thought that ASIO would be correct for ASIO audio. I installed, and have reinstalled, the drivers from their website.


I think you might need to uninstall the previous Chord Asio driver first, on this forum someone had a similar issue and they said removing the previous Chord driver for their mojo fixed it and the computer didn't get confused. Hopefully it's that simple let us know how you get 
http://jplay.eu/forum/index.php?/topic/3700-chord-qutest-cannot-play-with-jplay-mini/


----------



## beardyweirdy

The buttons on mine are sticking and operating randomly. Anyone else had this issue?


----------



## elira

beardyweirdy said:


> The buttons on mine are sticking and operating randomly. Anyone else had this issue?


They shouldn’t, are you in a very humid area? Did you spill something on it?


----------



## beardyweirdy

No, not at all. At one point the buttons were totally stuck


----------



## Laminator

beardyweirdy said:


> No, not at all. At one point the buttons were totally stuck


I experienced this twice.  First time the DAC was within the return window so the dealer replaced it.  Second time I sent it in for warranty repair.  Not sure what they did to fix it.  More discussion on page 379 of this thread.


----------



## beardyweirdy

It does appear to be an issue on some models.


----------



## miketlse

beardyweirdy said:


> It does appear to be an issue on some models.


How long have you been using the Qutest?


----------



## Womaz (Oct 23, 2022)

The sticky buttons happens to me on occasions too ……but for me at least it’s only temporary for some reason

just to add I rarely use the buttons as rarely change the filter and the source is never changed


----------



## beardyweirdy

Not long but it was an ex demo model


----------



## miketlse

beardyweirdy said:


> Not long but it was an ex demo model


In that case you are a bit 'at the mercy' of all the previous demoers who may have had sweaty fingers, or used 'excessive force' when using the buttons.
For long term peace of mind, a deep clean by the dealer or Chord support is probably the best solution.
Email support@chordelectronics.co.uk and explain the situation, and see what they propose as the way forward.


----------



## Stu Clark

Oh I have posted a thread & then found this one 🙈🙈🙈.

I guess the ‘other’ thread will be ignored as  it seems like I should have posted ‘here’

Excuse the Newbie 🤷‍♂️.

Here is the question:

Hello there,

I’m sorry to ask but I thought this would be the best place to ask for help as I know the focus here will be solely on sound quality…….

I have connected the Node to the Qutest via the COAX on the Node & using the BNC on the QUTEST in order to bypass the internal DAC on the Node.

But……. I obviously want to get the best quality & also from MQA.

In your opinion’s should I alter the settings or should I leave them because the device should be automatically playing at the best resolution without unfolding the file?

I remember seeing some advice online that states “Disable Tone Controls—Disable Replay Gain—Enable Iutput Level Fixed—Enable MQA External DAC”

However I am concerned that I may be then tampering with the quality of ‘non MQA’ files? I have no idea really.

Attached is a pic of my current settings.

If anybody could throw some pointers I would be grateful! Oh, I also set my Node volume to High so I am not using much range on my amp as it has a dial (Accuphase).

I hope this was clear 🙈.


----------



## Reactcore

.


----------



## Reactcore (Oct 24, 2022)

Stu Clark said:


> Oh I have posted a thread & then found this one 🙈🙈🙈.
> 
> I guess the ‘other’ thread will be ignored as  it seems like I should have posted ‘here’
> 
> ...



Qutest (like all Chord DAC's) dont support MQA hardware unfolding.
It will sound better playing original non MQA material


----------



## beardyweirdy

Not sure if my defective qutest is within warranty, or not. I doubt the dealer will do anything as it was taken by them as a px, so its effectively ' buyer beware. A bit annoyed as its only the second time  have used it. Anyone had an out of warranty repair completed by Chord?.


----------



## Reactcore

beardyweirdy said:


> Not sure if my defective qutest is within warranty, or not. I doubt the dealer will do anything as it was taken by them as a px, so its effectively ' buyer beware. A bit annoyed as its only the second time  have used it. Anyone had an out of warranty repair completed by Chord?.


A one year warranty starts counting from the purchasing date on a official seller's receipt.

Or gets rejected if Chord thinks the unit is tampered with.. if the latter is the case they should communicate first and quote i guess.


----------



## Roybenz

When Will qutest 2 come out?


----------



## uzi2

Roybenz said:


> When Will qutest 2 come out?


What improvements are you expecting in Qutest 2?


----------



## miketlse

You could still have a long wait.
At the start of this year Rob Watts was managing expectations by pointing out that the current global chip shortage, meant that the lead time for some components that he needed for testing of prototype boards was of the order of 12 months.
Since then I have seen no reports that the chip shortage is over, so I am not optimistic that 'normal service' with new Chord products will be possible in the near future.
True that the new xScaler seems still to be next in the pipeline for Q4 or Q1, but Chord are very tight lipped otherwise.

Just my personal view, but with the current economic outlook, I am not confident of many new products before 2024.


----------



## Charente

uzi2 said:


> What improvements are you expecting in Qutest 2?


Indeed ... as a relatively new owner of the QUTEST, I think it is superb as it is and I don't know how one could improve it significantly. Although perhaps the MOJO 2 DSP-HD might be nice.


----------



## miketlse

beardyweirdy said:


> Not sure if my defective qutest is within warranty, or not. I doubt the dealer will do anything as it was taken by them as a px, so its effectively ' buyer beware. A bit annoyed as its only the second time  have used it. Anyone had an out of warranty repair completed by Chord?.


Quite a few owners if you search the threads.
Chord often go the extra mile for owners who are out of warranty.
But if you don't ask the initial question by contacting Chord support, the answer will always be no.................


----------



## Jetblack08

uzi2 said:


> What improvements are you expecting in Qutest 2?


A compatible, cheaper M-Scaler for the Qutest would be nice.


----------



## JelStIy

beardyweirdy said:


> The buttons on mine are sticking and operating randomly. Anyone else had this issue?


I had that issue. It helps to flip the device over and then back again. I discovered this accidentally when I was looking for the serial number. I did it a few times when stickiness happened and now they never stick anymore.


----------



## Atriya (Nov 6, 2022)

Reactcore said:


> Hi! Be sure u try driving your HP ditect out of Qutest. I also use a 800 which with 300ohm is perfectly suited. Im controlling my vollume digitally with foobar. No amp.. no loss. Qutest has actually a powerful amp on board. I made a simple rca to jack adapter for it.



Ever since I discovered that the Qutest can drive headphones directly from the RCA outputs, this has become my staple. Currently driving Focal Utopia 2022 from it, and it works beautifully. I've even custom-ordered a dual-RCA to Focal-LEMO headphone cable (from Lavricables), to avoid using an adapter as @Reactcore does.

It works so well that I now wonder why anyone who isn't using a super-hard-to-drive headphone (HE6/Susvara/etc) bothers to use an amp at all. It seems that the vast majority of headphones can be driven with 3V output of the Qutest (reducing to 2V or even 1V as I do for the sensitive Utopia). I use HQPlayer for volume control. I can understand using a tube amp for an intentionally colored sound, but why would anyone (unless using Susvara et al. as mentioned above) want to use a SS amp with the Qutest? When I used my Burson Soloist 3XP, the sound was noticeably less transparent.


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> Ever since I discovered that the Qutest can drive headphones directly from the RCA outputs, this has become my staple. Currently driving Focal Utopia 2022 from it, and it works beautifully. I've even custom-ordered a dual-RCA to Focal-LEMO headphone cable (from Lavricables), to avoid using an adapter as @Reactcore does.
> 
> It works so well that I now wonder why anyone who isn't using a super-hard-to-drive headphone (HE6/Susvara/etc) bothers to use an amp at all. It seems that the vast majority of headphones can be driven with 3V output of the Qutest (reducing to 2V or even 1V as I do for the sensitive Utopia). I use HQPlayer for volume control. I can understand using a tube amp for an intentionally colored sound, but why would anyone (unless using Susvara et al. as mentioned above) want to use a SS amp with the Qutest? When I used my Burson Soloist 3XP, the sound was noticeably less transparent.



I have also made a special RCA to HD800 plugs cable.. and even modified my Qutest internal PSU section with buffer caps for more dynamics


----------



## Atriya (Nov 7, 2022)

Reactcore said:


> I have also made a special RCA to HD800 plugs cable.. and even modified my Qutest internal PSU section with buffer caps for more dynamics



Interesting, do you think the need for the buffer caps mod depends on the headphone? For example my Focal has 80 ohm impedance vs. I think 300 ohm for your HD800.


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> Interesting, do you think the need for the buffer caps mod depends on the headphone? For example my Focal has 80 ohm impedance vs. I think 300 ohm for your HD800.


See My post earlier in this thread.

I think lower impedance headphones benefit more than higher ohm ones. (they take more current)

Qutest output stage is good capable but the psu regulation section is designed for line drive and lacks a bit current reserve.


----------



## Atriya

Reactcore said:


> See My post earlier in this thread.
> 
> I think lower impedance headphones benefit more than higher ohm ones. (they take more current)
> 
> Qutest output stage is good capable but the psu regulation section is designed for line drive and lacks a bit current reserve.



Interesting, thanks. I don't think I'll risk doing this mod, but things still sound very good without it.


----------



## Sixthreefive

@Reactcore inspired me to try driving my Fostex TH-600 direclty from my Qutest's RCA out. The TH-600 has an impedance of 25 Ω and a sensitivity of 94dB. Output voltage for the Qutest was set to 2V. Qutest was connect via USB to the PC which controlled the volume through Windows. I hate to admit it but this sounded better, more transparent and had more depth, than when going through my Burson Soloist 3XP.

Unfortunately I've switch back to driving the TH-600 with the Soloist because I'm just unsure if direct driving my headphones from the Qutest long term would result in any damage. I'll get a TT2 one day but until then I'd sure love to direct drive my headphones with the Qutest if I knew it was completely safe.


----------



## Rob Watts

Sixthreefive said:


> @Reactcore inspired me to try driving my Fostex TH-600 direclty from my Qutest's RCA out. The TH-600 has an impedance of 25 Ω and a sensitivity of 94dB. Output voltage for the Qutest was set to 2V. Qutest was connect via USB to the PC which controlled the volume through Windows. I hate to admit it but this sounded better, more transparent and had more depth, than when going through my Burson Soloist 3XP.
> 
> Unfortunately I've switch back to driving the TH-600 with the Soloist because I'm just unsure if direct driving my headphones from the Qutest long term would result in any damage. I'll get a TT2 one day but until then I'd sure love to direct drive my headphones with the Qutest if I knew it was completely safe.


Qutest uses the same output stage as Mojo so will safely drive 25 ohm loads - so no need to worry about driving your TH-600.


----------



## Sixthreefive

Thank you @Rob Watts. I truly appreciated your response.


----------



## JohnM-73 (Nov 10, 2022)

Just had this email from Fanthorpes here in the UK :

“Chord Electronics prices are set for a noticeable jump on the 1st of December.

With that in mind we wanted to give you the heads up. If you are thinking about purchasing a piece of Chord, now is the time to do so.

The price rise will hit every model of Chord Electronics, except the Mojo2 and Poly.”

Second price rise in a year I believe… this chip shortage crises (I presume this is likely the reason?) is really hitting hard :/ Feel fortunate my order for a Hugo 2 has already gone through - just waiting for a delivery date.


----------



## drummerdimitri

I am considering pairing a Qutest DAC to my Niimbus US 5 Pro headphone amplifier.

Currently feeding the amp balanced out from my Questyle CMA400i and it sounds great! Would the Qutest be a substantial upgrade since I also own a Mojo and it is inferior to the Questyle as a DAC.


----------



## Reactcore

drummerdimitri said:


> I am considering pairing a Qutest DAC to my Niimbus US 5 Pro headphone amplifier.
> 
> Currently feeding the amp balanced out from my Questyle CMA400i and it sounds great! Would the Qutest be a substantial upgrade since I also own a Mojo and it is inferior to the Questyle as a DAC.


Until you hook Qutest or Mojo to the 400i Amp section.. but it needs a modification as you can see in my thread in my signature.


----------



## drummerdimitri

Reactcore said:


> Until you hook Qutest or Mojo to the 400i Amp section.. but it needs a modification as you can see in my thread in my signature.



I think you misunderstood. 

I'm asking if the Qutest DAC would be an upgrade from my CMA400i DAC for my Niimbus amplifier.


----------



## Reactcore

drummerdimitri said:


> I think you misunderstood.
> 
> I'm asking if the Qutest DAC would be an upgrade from my CMA400i DAC for my Niimbus amplifier.


In my ears is quite a step up from 400i's AKM chip. I could do fast A-B on my Questyle switching between internal dac and both Mojo and Qutest
On Niimbus i expect a similar difference


----------



## Atriya

@Reactcore I noticed that if power is cut to the Qutest while headphones are still connected (directly), there is a loud "thump" sound in both channels. Hopefully nothing that can damage headphones? Happened in both 1V and 2V mode, thankfully I don't use 3V.


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> @Reactcore I noticed that if power is cut to the Qutest while headphones are still connected (directly), there is a loud "thump" sound in both channels. Hopefully nothing that can damage headphones? Happened in both 1V and 2V mode, thankfully I don't use 3V.


I had the same.
I didnt worry about it with my 300ohm senns Probably why Qutest has no powerswitch and is said to just leave it on.


----------



## Atriya

Reactcore said:


> I had the same.
> I didnt worry about it with my 300ohm senns Probably why Qutest has no powerswitch and is said to just leave it on.


Yeah, well, my 80 ohm Utopias still work and there is no audible damage, so hopefully all is well. Will still be careful about this going forward.


----------



## Atriya

Reactcore said:


> See My post earlier in this thread.
> 
> I think lower impedance headphones benefit more than higher ohm ones. (they take more current)
> 
> Qutest output stage is good capable but the psu regulation section is designed for line drive and lacks a bit current reserve.



Do you think that running in 1V vs. 2V mode on the Qutest (while volume matching by changing the attenuation) might change anything with current supply? I think I hear somewhat better sound in 2V mode (even though I'm attenuating the signal more to lower volume). Can't think of a way to explain this.


----------



## Reactcore

Atriya said:


> Do you think that running in 1V vs. 2V mode on the Qutest (while volume matching by changing the attenuation) might change anything with current supply? I think I hear somewhat better sound in 2V mode (even though I'm attenuating the signal more to lower volume). Can't think of a way to explain this.


I think 1v is better as long you keep overhead (not needing to turn your app's volume to max)

As app attenuating tends to cut the lowest amplitude signals out at the cost of dynamic range.


----------



## Roybenz

Would there be any point in getting sbooster for the qutest when i have a isotek Aquarius v5 Power filter ?


----------



## The Jester

Roybenz said:


> Would there be any point in getting sbooster for the qutest when i have a isotek Aquarius v5 Power filter ?


I guess in the end only listening for yourself is what matters most,
In another thread there’s a poll for stock vs aftermarket power supplies for the Qutest …
Stock 37%
Aftermarket 63% …


----------



## LegionofDoom

The Jester said:


> I guess in the end only listening for yourself is what matters most,
> In another thread there’s a poll for stock vs aftermarket power supplies for the Qutest …
> Stock 37%
> Aftermarket 63% …


I replaced the stock Qutest power supply with a Plixir BDC 2A and the Statement cable.   I have about 200 hours on it now.   I had both power cords plugged in to a PSAudio Powerplant 12 before and after the swap.

I would say the Plixir improvement is subtle.  Most detectable would be classical music with quiet passages where you want black backgrounds or mellow jazz with detailed passages like brushes on a snare drum.  And again, it is subtle.   On rock and blues I did not find much of notable difference.  YMMV.


----------



## Thompsonkirk (Nov 27, 2022)

SMALL GREEN COMPUTER'S LPS FOR QUTEST?

I've searched here and elsewhere for info about Small Green Computer's 5v linear power supply for Qutest, but can find no review and no comparison vs. other LPS's.

 Does anyone have info about SGC's comparative effect on SQ – from experience, Internet posts, or plain old rumor?

SGC makes Sonore and SonicTransporter gear. Their 5v LPS is half the price of an SBooster and comes with a connector explicitly for Qutest, but maybe the half price means it sounds only half as good? 

TIA for any info,

Kirk T


----------



## rush1

I am highly considering to upgrade my desktop DAC, currently Mojo2 to Qutest feeding the Burson Soloist 3X GT.

What kind of improvements you know that I shall be expecting? For those do have both or have experience on both Mojo2 and Qutest please do chime in.

Thanks


----------



## Reactcore

rush1 said:


> I am highly considering to upgrade my desktop DAC, currently Mojo2 to Qutest feeding the Burson Soloist 3X GT.
> 
> What kind of improvements you know that I shall be expecting? For those do have both or have experience on both Mojo2 and Qutest please do chime in.
> 
> Thanks



I think it will be a close call in SQ.
Comparing them brings these points imo

Both have almost same tapcount ~50k
Both can accept Mscaler dual data
M2 can operate off the net against RF noise which is a plus if using toslink in
Qutest's 10 element pulse array outperforms M2's 4 element, this matters for small signal accuracy (depth reproduction)
M2 has EQ option, Qutest 3 filters or off
Qutest has galvanic USB isolation, not shure of M2's USB
Last note is always: have a listen to both


----------



## rush1

Dank u @Reactcore for the comparison and the explanation. I was wondering whether the SQ shall have a big difference, it it's not then, I can still live with the M2 as desktop DAC, and can just save a little bit more to get another cans 
I was planning to make a direct comparison between the M2 and Qutest, but my local dealer Qutest is unavailable at that time. I will wait for it to become available then.

Best Wishes to you


----------



## Atriya (Nov 29, 2022)

rush1 said:


> I am highly considering to upgrade my desktop DAC, currently Mojo2 to Qutest feeding the Burson Soloist 3X GT.
> 
> What kind of improvements you know that I shall be expecting? For those do have both or have experience on both Mojo2 and Qutest please do chime in.
> 
> Thanks



I own both the Mojo2 and the Qutest. I hear a markedly more open soundstage with the Qutest, with Focal Utopia 2022 headphones.

That said, while I use the Mojo2 "normally" - USB in and 3.5mm out to the headphones - my setup with the Qutest is highly modified. For one, I drive my headphones directly out of the RCA outs of the Qutest with a custom-ordered headphone cable (no amp used, though I actually own a Burson 3XP and prefer the sound _without _it). The Qutest is powered by an iPower Elite with an iFi SupaNova power cable. Finally, there are multiple levels of filtering (RF, DC offset block) applied to a dual-coax input from an Audiowise SRC-DX DDC. Any or all of these could be causing the differences I hear instead of intrinsic differences between the Qutest and Mojo2.

I might get a dual-BNC to 3.5mm dual coax adapter for the Mojo2 to enable a more fair comparison with the Qutest: just haven't gotten to it yet, since it has no purpose other than to conduct that comparison, as I don't use the Mojo2 in desktop mode: I bought it purely for portable use.


----------



## Thompsonkirk

Isn’t it about time for Qutest2?

This thread has set me thinking. If Qutest originally used DAC stage from Hugo, and we now have Hugo2 and HugoTT2, wouldn’t you expect a Qutest 2 to follow soon - if not to have appeared already?  
(A service person told me the electronics and firmware haven’t changed since inception.)


----------



## rush1

Atriya said:


> I own both the Mojo2 and the Qutest. I hear a markedly more open soundstage with the Qutest, with Focal Utopia 2022 headphones.
> 
> That said, while I use the Mojo2 "normally" - USB in and 3.5mm out to the headphones - my setup with the Qutest is highly modified. For one, I drive my headphones directly out of the RCA outs of the Qutest with a custom-ordered headphone cable (no amp used, though I actually own a Burson 3XP and prefer the sound _without _it). The Qutest is powered by an iPower Elite with an iFi SupaNova power cable. Finally, there are multiple levels of filtering (RF, DC offset block) applied to a dual-coax input from an Audiowise SRC-DX DDC. Any or all of these could be causing the differences I hear instead of intrinsic differences between the Qutest and Mojo2.
> 
> I might get a dual-BNC to 3.5mm dual coax adapter for the Mojo2 to enable a more fair comparison with the Qutest: just haven't gotten to it yet, since it has no purpose other than to conduct that comparison, as I don't use the Mojo2 in desktop mode: I bought it purely for portable use.


Hi @Atriya, thank you for replying.
I noted that you can hear a markedly open soundstage with Qutest highly modified, while M2 is in normal connection.
Thanks for sharing your modification for Qutest it is quite interesting especially with DDC, I have not tried it but read about it.

Happy listening


----------



## Atriya

Thompsonkirk said:


> Isn’t it about time for Qutest2?
> 
> This thread has set me thinking. If Qutest originally used DAC stage from Hugo, and we now have Hugo2 and HugoTT2, wouldn’t you expect a Qutest 2 to follow soon - if not to have appeared already?
> (A service person told me the electronics and firmware haven’t changed since inception.)


The Qutest is based on the Hugo 2, not on the original Hugo. That said, even the Hugo 2 is many years old, so maybe a Hugo 3 and Qutest 2 can be expected.


----------



## drrohitarora

rush1 said:


> Dank u @Reactcore for the comparison and the explanation. I was wondering whether the SQ shall have a big difference, it it's not then, I can still live with the M2 as desktop DAC, and can just save a little bit more to get another cans
> I was planning to make a direct comparison between the M2 and Qutest, but my local dealer Qutest is unavailable at that time. I will wait for it to become available then.
> 
> Best Wishes to you


I have both and use the Qutest through Allo Shanti LPS which I generally use to drive my Hedd active monitors through a GSX mini as a preamp. Despite the bump in SQ, I also notice a significant noise reduction with the Qutest versus Mojo2 where my active monitors continue to pick up some noise while on mojo2 even when no music is playing.


----------



## rush1

drrohitarora said:


> I have both and use the Qutest through Allo Shanti LPS which I generally use to drive my Hedd active monitors through a GSX mini as a preamp. Despite the bump in SQ, I also notice a significant noise reduction with the Qutest versus Mojo2 where my active monitors continue to pick up some noise while on mojo2 even when no music is playing.


Hi @drrohitarora, thank you for chiming in,
Do you listen on headphone by the way, and notice the lowered noise via the Qutest as well? I’ve been thinking adding a power supply as well.


----------



## Atriya (Dec 3, 2022)

Does anybody know how I can delete a post?


----------



## drummerdimitri

I bought a new Qutest DAC and loving the natural sound it produces.

Been using it with my gaming desktop pc though USB and have just switched to optical and the sound seems slightly less harsh with improved soundstage.

Would it make more sense to stick to Optical at 192 KHz/24 bit for spotify premium music or 192KHz/32 bit via USB?

Kind of prefer the sound from the optical input but was wondering if it would be a downgrade performance wise compared to USB.


----------



## Atriya

drummerdimitri said:


> I bought a new Qutest DAC and loving the natural sound it produces.
> 
> Been using it with my gaming desktop pc though USB and have just switched to optical and the sound seems slightly less harsh with improved soundstage.
> 
> ...



I believe that the designer has said that optical is the best input for the Qutest, because of the lack of electrical noise, and that the Qutest is immune to jitter.


----------



## Jgeffen (Dec 5, 2022)

drummerdimitri said:


> I bought a new Qutest DAC and loving the natural sound it produces.
> 
> Been using it with my gaming desktop pc though USB and have just switched to optical and the sound seems slightly less harsh with improved soundstage.
> 
> ...


I use optical with a QED Reference Optical Quartz cable.
Expensive, but not every optical cable can transmit 192khz.
Most of them are a kind of plastic, but not this one.
And Atriya is right too!


----------



## schneller

Does anyone have any intel on the Qutest II? I feel like the original has been with us a long time...


----------



## miketlse

schneller said:


> Does anyone have any intel on the Qutest II? I feel like the original has been with us a long time...


No .


----------



## LegionofDoom

miketlse said:


> No .


No.  And I would personally add the current Qutest is excellent, and perhaps the 1st audio product I have owned that I have not thought about upgrading outside of the power supply.   That's VERY rare for me.


----------



## Annarob1947

*a truly lovely  Dac, goes beautifully with Chords Anni .
I just upgraded to TT2, so if anyone wants a Qutest with 10 hrs approx on it i have for sale, half price.am Australian in Philippines*


----------



## dnnaudio

Annarob1947 said:


> *a truly lovely  Dac, goes beautifully with Chords Anni .
> I just upgraded to TT2, so if anyone wants a Qutest with 10 hrs approx on it i have for sale, half price.am Australian in Philippines*


I have always wondered how a Qutest w/ decent upgraded power supply compares to TT2.


----------



## JaquesGelee (Dec 18, 2022)

dnnaudio said:


> I have always wondered how a Qutest w/ decent upgraded power supply compares to TT2.


As far as i remember, no improvement, void warranty and may eventually damage your unit. Correct me, if i am wrong Mr. Watts.
But I don't want to start a heated discussion with people here, who hear the fleas coughing.


----------



## George Hincapie

JaquesGelee said:


> As far as i remember, no improvement, void warranty and may eventually damage your unit. Correct me, if i am wrong Mr. Watts.
> But I don't want to start a heated discussion with people here, who hear the fleas coughing.


Provided the correct voltage and amperage is provided, zero damage can occur.


----------



## drummerdimitri

dnnaudio said:


> I have always wondered how a Qutest w/ decent upgraded power supply compares to TT2.


It makes no difference at all even though people claim significant gains using an "upgraded" PSU. 

I've tried it with a massive 3.3F supercapacitor bank charged to 5V, 4xAA batteries and even a lab grade bench linear power supply and they all sound identical. 

I thought I was hearing differences at first but the more I listened the more I realized my brain was playing tricks on me and finally concluded that Rob was right all along as the power filtering inside the unit is so good that any other means of powering the unit results in more money lost and nothing gained.


----------



## Reactcore

drummerdimitri said:


> It makes no difference at all even though people claim significant gains using an "upgraded" PSU.
> 
> I've tried it with a massive 3.3F supercapacitor bank charged to 5V, 4xAA batteries and even a lab grade bench linear power supply and they all sound identical.
> 
> I thought I was hearing differences at first but the more I listened the more I realized my brain was playing tricks on me and finally concluded that Rob was right all along as the power filtering inside the unit is so good that any other means of powering the unit results in more money lost and nothing gained.


The thing is.. inside Qutest the voltage is regulated up to +/- 12v and then down to +/- 8v by switchmode method before feeding the line amp section.

So the PSU feeding it 5v becomes less important other then isolating for net RF. 
And for this it is carefully selected.


----------



## drummerdimitri (Dec 21, 2022)

Does anyone know if the unit re-clocks the optical input internally or is that only done on the USB input?

Edit: I got confirmation from a Chord rep that the Qutest re-clocks the data stream on all of its inputs so that's a relief!


----------



## jbarrentine

Put my unit in Classifieds


----------



## OCC7N (Dec 19, 2022)

@DecentLevi did you ever solve your bnc/di20 to qutest/spdif issue?

Im having ”similar” issues with di20he to TT2. Though I am using BNC/coax to BNC/Coax

Sorry for spam but did not bother reading 100posts!

I guess its because your qutest is also transformer coupled?


----------



## DecentLevi

OCC7N said:


> @DecentLevi did you ever solve your bnc/di20 to qutest/spdif issue?
> 
> Im having ”similar” issues with di20he to TT2. Though I am using BNC/coax to BNC/Coax
> 
> ...


Yes. Ever since a few changes in my system, I've never had the same occasional white noise on startup (which was before playing any audio) and squealing within navigation of DSD. The main changes being a somewhat thicker RCA coax cable (Odin 2 Silver cable knockoff), and the addition of iFi iPurifier 3 on a certain part of my chain. It was either those, or the fact that I switched to the Mojo 2 from the Qutest as DAC duties. Admittedly a minor downgrade, however I do recall mentioning something like DAC pairings is what causes the noise quirks from the DI20, and that may have been even before I upgraded cable. It seems the DI20 is picky with DACs; either that or it requires thicker RCA coax cables for the widest possible data transmission. I may never know which one.


----------



## OCC7N

I think Qutest is transformer coupled and Mojo is not.

Im trying to understand if TT2 is also transformee coupled.

If it is it wont work


----------



## JohnM-73

I too am waiting for the inevitable Qutest 2. Only recently got myself another Hugo 2 (at the risk of garnering derision, I’ve found myself preferring it’s sound signature overall to TT2), so am in no rush to upgrade. But I suspect a Qutest 2 would represent a sensibly priced end-game for me.


----------



## TheAbyss2022

Hi All,

I am looking at buying the Chord Qutest and replacing it with my current DAC (Topping D90). I am somewhat of a noob but my question is: The RCA Analogue out connecters on the Qutest are the RCA cables that will connect from the DAC to my Amp (Topping A90D)? I only use XLR to connect my DAC and amp so I want to make sure that that connecter is fine to connect to my A90D. 

thanks!


----------



## Reactcore

TheAbyss2022 said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I am looking at buying the Chord Qutest and replacing it with my current DAC (Topping D90). I am somewhat of a noob but my question is: The RCA Analogue out connecters on the Qutest are the RCA cables that will connect from the DAC to my Amp (Topping A90D)? I only use XLR to connect my DAC and amp so I want to make sure that that connecter is fine to connect to my A90D.
> 
> thanks!



You can just use RCA to RCA cables between Qutest > A90D. No problemo


----------



## blueninjasix

TheAbyss2022 said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I am looking at buying the Chord Qutest and replacing it with my current DAC (Topping D90). I am somewhat of a noob but my question is: The RCA Analogue out connecters on the Qutest are the RCA cables that will connect from the DAC to my Amp (Topping A90D)? I only use XLR to connect my DAC and amp so I want to make sure that that connecter is fine to connect to my A90D.
> 
> thanks!


I use these pseudo balanced rca to xlr connectors from Designacable in the UK https://www.designacable.com/musician-leads.html/unbalanced-leads/pseudo-balanced.html


----------



## Paul Bjernklo (Monday at 3:46 AM)

deleted


----------



## GuiltyRocker




----------



## Reactcore

See post under for a boxed optic dualdata link usable for Qutest and Mscaler

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/my-choral-housed-chord-mscaler.964931/post-17337052


----------

