Chord Qutest

[barrows]

On 7/15/2018 at 7:30 AM, OldBigEars said:

Has anyone compared Qutest directly to the RME DAC?  I read a review recently comparing the RME with the Chord Hugo 2 and it rather bettered it.  Given the RME costs around $1000 I'm not sure why I would choose the Qutest, which apparently benefits greatly from a supplementary power supply.

This would not be the result I would expect, having owned some RME gear in the past.  Link to the review, or source at least?

[OldBigEars]

9 hours ago, barrows said:

This would not be the result I would expect, having owned some RME gear in the past.  Link to the review, or source at least?

 

Here you go.... maybe the outcome would be different with testing through speakers?

 

https://headfonics.com/2018/04/rme-adi-2-dac-review/2

Chord Hugo 2

Compared to the Chord Hugo 2, I feel like the RME sounds more vivid in the midrange. But I guess it is because of Chord’s WTA filters that make the treble sound more extended. When using very power-hungry headphones, the RME provides a stronger ground while the sound can get grittier or brittle when nearing max power of the Chord.

With very sensitive IEMs, I feel like the Hugo 2 is even tighter in the bass despite having more audible hiss when compared to the Phones output of the RME. This changes, however, when I switch to RME’s IEM output which improves on clarity and precision.

All in all, the RME is more versatile and ultimately impresses more with both, headphones that need low volume precision and those that need power. Of course, the RME has the advantage of size and external PSU whereas the Hugo 2 is a fully portable device.

Our Verdict

I can’t think of any other desktop DAC/amp combo that would be easier to recommend in 2018. There is no magic involved in the RME ADI-2 DAC: no proprietary filters, no patented exclusive circuits, no unordinary connections and most importantly no voodoo buzz words. This is an extremely down-to-earth device that has just been given extreme thought, massive experience and great attention to detail. It’s not the supplier’s chip that makes a great device, it is how you use the tools.

The ADI-2 DAC is technically marvelous, regardless of whether you want to dive into the long feature list or not. I do recommend you do, though, because the equalizer with its many save slots, the customizable loudness function, the tight crossfeed, various DA filters and many controls to test your whole audio chain just keep on giving and giving. Despite the huge amount of functions, the software is extremely stable and hasn’t failed me once.

While the Phones output provides clean and linear amplification for even power hungry headphones, the new IEM output might just have reached a new reference level. Of course, the device will work just as well as a standalone DAC in case you want to connect some warm tubes with the line-out. The channel-specific dual EQ or quick bass/treble adjustments can work wonders for a speaker setup.

I praised the RME ADI-2 Pro before and it proved to be a massive success. At 1.599 € (or 1.999 € for the black Anniversary Edition) it challenged competitive high-end products and it seems almost unfair that we now can get the same performance for a lot less, e.g. 999 €. Friends of high-fidelity, what are you waiting for?

 

[OldBigEars]

On 7/15/2018 at 8:56 PM, rhern213 said:

 

I had an ADI-2 but sold it before I got my Qutest so I couldn't do a direct comparison. However... while I had my ADI-2 I also had a Schiit Bifrost Multibit and The ADI-2 as a DAC only and Bimby sounded identical to my ears. I ended up keeping the Bimby because it was half the price.

 

Then I got the Qutest to compare to the Bimby and it was in a complete other league to me. There was no aspect of the sound the Bimby was close in. So given the Bimby and ADI-2 were identical to me, I would safely say the Qutest is a good amount better than the ADI-2.

 

The Hugo2 and Qutest are supposed to be the same, except for the Qutest having GI USB. So IMO I would probably say the complete opposite of whatever review you read. How was this review you read done? Where both DAC's tested with their internal amps? separate amps? Through what inputs/outputs? There are tons of factors that will affect the outcome, which will sound completely different in whatever system you personally have.

 

If you're able to find the DAC's somewhere that you can test or maybe buy and return the one you don't want I would suggest that so you can see how they fit with your particular system. 

 

Thanks for sharing your experiences.  It's hard to triangulate tests from different times but you seem to have found a clear superiority for Qutest in your setup.  I'm intrigued and hope to be able to find one to test some day.

[OldBigEars]

On ‎7‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 8:56 PM, rhern213 said:

 

I had an ADI-2 but sold it before I got my Qutest so I couldn't do a direct comparison. However... while I had my ADI-2 I also had a Schiit Bifrost Multibit and The ADI-2 as a DAC only and Bimby sounded identical to my ears. I ended up keeping the Bimby because it was half the price.

 

Then I got the Qutest to compare to the Bimby and it was in a complete other league to me. There was no aspect of the sound the Bimby was close in. So given the Bimby and ADI-2 were identical to me, I would safely say the Qutest is a good amount better than the ADI-2.

 

The Hugo2 and Qutest are supposed to be the same, except for the Qutest having GI USB. So IMO I would probably say the complete opposite of whatever review you read. How was this review you read done? Where both DAC's tested with their internal amps? separate amps? Through what inputs/outputs? There are tons of factors that will affect the outcome, which will sound completely different in whatever system you personally have.

 

If you're able to find the DAC's somewhere that you can test or maybe buy and return the one you don't want I would suggest that so you can see how they fit with your particular system. 

 

 

Just out of interest - how long did you own your ADI-2 before selling it.  I was under the impression it's quite a new model.  Maybe it needed more break-in time?

[rhern213]

14 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

 

 

Just out of interest - how long did you own your ADI-2 before selling it.  I was under the impression it's quite a new model.  Maybe it needed more break-in time?

 

I got the ADI-2 as soon as it was available and was testing it with the Bimby for about a month. They were both always on so they had plenty of burn-in time.

 

I've never heard the Hugo2, so maybe the AMP section on the ADI-2 is better? But if tested as DAC's only the Chord products are clearly better to me.

 

 

[barrows]

@OldBigEars, looks like that review is mostly about how the RME drives the reviewer's favored headphones, rather than the actual DAC performance or sound quality.  That appears to be more about matching amp to specific headphones than anything else.  Additionally, does anyone else detect a rather strong reviewer bias against high end audio manufacturers in the reviewer's tone?

I have not heard the newer RME, but I used to own one of the better RME ADC/DAC interfaces, and while it was capable, it was certainly nothing special from a sound quality perspective.

[mentt]

On 7/13/2018 at 12:27 PM, dbq5anlxj said:

are you able to play native dsd use this setup? thanks

 

Sorry, I have sold Qutest as I have sold my Hugo years ago. Chord DACs have “wow” feel at first, but after some time you no longer enjoy it as mutch... This is it for me with Chord DACs

[jos]

On 7/15/2018 at 5:02 PM, photonman said:

Received my Qutest.  I have previously owned the Qute and 2Cute and I always looked back to my Chord DAC days as the days that were my favorite.  I can say the Qute did benefit from an LPS but when I went to the 2Cute, that benefit disappeared in my system.  I had used an LPS for the USB input, a separate LPS for the main power and I could not hear a difference. 

 

So my strategy with the Qutest is minimalism and so I am going straight from a computer/streamer into USB and using the supplied switcher.  The background is dead silent in my speakers, nothing but black.  Spotify has never sounded so good I dropped Tidal too as the convenience of Spotify and its much better curated and machine learned playlists was too much to overlook, and $10 cheaper to boot. 

 

So yes I am making concessions all over the place but making the best of what I have decided to work with too.  I will stay with this Qutest for a long time having learned my lesson with selling the other two.

I am running my Chord Qutest with the standard switcher too, and it sounds at least as good as with the Sbooster. After connecting my Sbooster to the ultraRendu the sound seems to be even better, more relaxed/stable. I guess an LPS is more important for the ultraRendu than for the Qutest. Can someone confirm this, or is this just wishful thinking?

[kbkaran]

On 7/15/2018 at 8:02 AM, photonman said:

Received my Qutest.  I have previously owned the Qute and 2Cute and I always looked back to my Chord DAC days as the days that were my favorite.  I can say the Qute did benefit from an LPS but when I went to the 2Cute, that benefit disappeared in my system.  I had used an LPS for the USB input, a separate LPS for the main power and I could not hear a difference. 

 

.....

 

I am still running a 2Cute and it looks like it's coax input is better than USB when it is feed from a Mutec MC3+USB (with BNC). I have ifi usb isolator and jitterbug as well. But the Mutec clearly wins. Also, Fidelizer improves the sound of JRiver from my windows 10 laptop. 

So I am very skeptical about the Qutest USB being "perfect" and included switching power supply being "good".

Earlier I was actually running USB into the 2Cute because of all the talk about it being perfect. I am really surprised (and disappointed) that the USB input is not cutting it. USB sounds little harsh and soundstage clarity is not there (compared to Mutec). 

Does anybody have any experience like this ? Or am I preferring a harsher sound from the Mutec.

[ecwl]

3 hours ago, kbkaran said:

I am really surprised (and disappointed) that the USB input is not cutting it. USB sounds little harsh and soundstage clarity is not there (compared to Mutec). 

Does anybody have any experience like this ? Or am I preferring a harsher sound from the Mutec.

I don’t have Qutest but have owned Chord DAVE since it came out. Qutest USB galvanically isolation is identical to DAVE. When DAVE was released, the designer Rob Watts originally thought that the USB galvanic isolation was outstanding and eliminates any noise issues. However, he uses a modern laptop playing off battery. Once the product is in the field, what he found was that 1) there are many worse USB sources out there with so much noise that the USB galvanic isolation cannot filter and 2) many people don’t run their USB off batteries so there is always some ground loop leakage current noise and varying degrees can get through. My experience is that while Jitterbug can reduce these effects, depending on your source, it may not completely eliminate the noise. Fortunately, @JohnSwenson has extensively posted here on various CA forums the best way to optimize USB sources and how to eliminate ground loop leakage current noise.

That said, having tried many USB DACs, I still find DAVE’s USB galvanic isolation to be amongst the best. But ultimately, if you want to get the very best USB performance out of Qutest, you still need to optimize your USB source.

If you want to hear what Rob Watts intended the Qutest sound to be like, you can actually use the Mutec to connect to Qutest using Toslink (and unplug the USB+coax from Qutest just in case some noise leaks in). Chord DACs jitter rejection are outstanding so Toslink jitter would not influence the sound of the DAC.

[barrows]

USB galvanic isolation is never "perfect", there will always be some noise coupling across the isolation.  While I do prefer my DACs to have isolated USB inputs, they still will need a good, clean USB source to sound their best.  At Sonore we have heard from many DAVE owners who love using the DAVE with the ultraRendu and Signature Rendu SE.

[kbkaran]

11 hours ago, ecwl said:

...

If you want to hear what Rob Watts intended the Qutest sound to be like, you can actually use the Mutec to connect to Qutest using Toslink (and unplug the USB+coax from Qutest just in case some noise leaks in). Chord DACs jitter rejection are outstanding so Toslink jitter would not influence the sound of the DAC.

Thanks for the response. I have been on this jitter thing for the past 20 years (even following John Swenson's ideas for the long or so). I do agree that the USB source should be good (but what happened to asynchronous usb which was supposed to be delink the pc from the equation ?).  The fact Fidelizer made a difference means asynch USB is not providing its benefits. It is just not the group loop or noise. 2qute or Qutest supposed to have good regulation but I bet after-market power supplies will make a difference (in my case, the ifi ipower difference in 2Qute was so very obvious).  Would love to hear people's experiences on this front.

So what I can deduce from your assertion (especially with reference to *Rendu) is that the USB source can be optimized both for electrical and timing characteristics. May be my Mutec helps on this front (I got it to help with my TACT amplifier which did not have a USB input). I was planning to sell it and am now feeling it may be worthwhile to keep it even with a USB DAC in the picture. 

[Superdad]

11 hours ago, ecwl said:

That said, having tried many USB DACs, I still find DAVE’s USB galvanic isolation to be amongst the best. But ultimately, if you want to get the very best USB performance out of Qutest, you still need to optimize your USB source.

 

Please remember that all DACs with digital isolator chips ("galvanic isolation") place them on the I2S lines AFTER the USB input PHY/processor.  Hence noise and leakage still affect the USB input stage.

Only current exception to this is the new $5,700 Auralic Vega G2--and some of PeterSt.'s Phasure NOS1a DACs. Those both use the same Silanna USB isolation chip--right at the input--as we use in the ISO REGEN.

[jos]

8 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Please remember that all DACs with digital isolator chips ("galvanic isolation") place them on the I2S lines AFTER the USB input PHY/processor.  Hence noise and leakage still affect the USB input stage.

Only current exception to this is the new $5,700 Auralic Vega G2--and some of PeterSt.'s Phasure NOS1a DACs. Those both use the same Silanna USB isolation chip--right at the input--as we use in the ISO REGEN.

Can we find this chip also in the ultraRendu, because they say there is a kind of ISO REGEN inside this device?

[Frojo]

troubleshooting -  I have just found my Qutest with all of its lights flashing- i am powering it with an LPS1.2 at 5V.

Any suggestions gratefully received....

[ecwl]

16 minutes ago, Frojo said:

troubleshooting -  I have just found my Qutest with all of its lights flashing- i am powering it with an LPS1.2 at 5V.

Any suggestions gratefully received....

Hmmm... If you go back to the original power supply, does it still do that?

If not, at least you know Qutest is fine. If you still get all the flashing lights, maybe you accidentally fried the Qutest when you accidentally put LPS1.2 into a higher voltage?

What are you powering the LPS1.2 with? Is it possible that for some reason, LPS1.2 is not getting enough power? Are you using the LPS1.2 to power something else in addition to Qutest?

[Frojo]

Thanks ecwl,

The Qutest appears to be working normally with its original smps.

The LPS 1.2 definitely set at 5v (as it has been since it was introduced a month or so ago)

It is powered with its Uptone Smps and is serving the Qutest only...

There is no mention of flashing lights in the operating instructions so i am not sure whether it is indicative of an over/under voltage provision or a.n.other failure- i will try and do some testing tomorrow.

[Gdbgdb]

Can anyone comment on qutest performance vs 2qute?

 

Also, how much better is the aurilac vega 2 vs the qutest with an aries streamer?

[ecwl]

On 8/4/2018 at 3:55 PM, Gdbgdb said:

Can anyone comment on qutest performance vs 2qute?

I have not listened to Qutest but I have listened to most current Chord DACs including Hugo 2 and Hugo which are essentially the volume-controllable versions of Qutest & 2Qute.

First, 2Qute always puts out 3V RMS but Qutest can be set to 1V/2V/3V. I was surprised by how many preamplifiers actually will be clipped by the 3V output. So that might be a factor.

Otherwise, Qutest has 10 element pulse array DAC with a higher order noise shaper so you'll hear more resolution and better soundstage. Qutest also has more taps but more importantly, a different 16fs to 256fs upsampling filter so you'll here better timing, transient and timbre. If it's a choice between Qutest vs a discounted used 2Qute, I would recommend anyone with the money to get the Qutest, assuming your signal chain following Qutest is sufficiently revealing (transparent preamp/amp, no Class D amps).

If you own 2Qute but have the money to upgrade Qutest, I would also recommend upgrading. But if you're happy with 2Qute and don't plan on upgrading, 2Qute is still a great DAC.

 

On 8/4/2018 at 3:55 PM, Gdbgdb said:

Also, how much better is the aurilac vega 2 vs the qutest with an aries streamer?

I have not heard the Auralic Vega G2. I am biased because I think Chord Mojo sounds better than most DACs so I actually suspect I would find Qutest sounds better than Auralic Vega G2. But the other aspect is, if you get Qutest, you don't have to get an Aries streamer. There are many other potential options for streamer.

 

With all that said, some people really don't like Chord DAC sound. So you should probably listen to some Chord DACs, preferably in your own system, before deciding on whether you want one.

[asdf1000]

On 7/24/2018 at 8:51 AM, Superdad said:

 

Please remember that all DACs with digital isolator chips ("galvanic isolation") place them on the I2S lines AFTER the USB input PHY/processor.  Hence noise and leakage still affect the USB input stage.

Only current exception to this is the new $5,700 Auralic Vega G2--and some of PeterSt.'s Phasure NOS1a DACs. Those both use the same Silanna USB isolation chip--right at the input--as we use in the ISO REGEN.

 

The new iFi Pro iDSD? Or have they gone a different direction from their iGalvanic (which uses the same Silanna isolator)?

 

[Superdad]

4 hours ago, Em2016 said:

The new iFi Pro iDSD? Or have they gone a different direction from their iGalvanic (which uses the same Silanna isolator)?

 

Based on photos of the boards that turn up in a Google search, it seems clear that the Pro iDSD has its digital isolator chips on the I2S/DSD lines at the output of their input board—just as is done with many other DACs/DDCs.  Nothing wrong with that.  Just means that the USB input stage still shares the same ground domain with the computer—unless one adds a GI device before the DAC.

[asdf1000]

12 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Based on photos of the boards that turn up in a Google search, it seems clear that the Pro iDSD has its digital isolator chips on the I2S/DSD lines at the output of their input board—just as is done with many other DACs/DDCs.  Nothing wrong with that.  Just means that the USB input stage still shares the same ground domain with the computer—unless one adds a GI device before the DAC.

 

Noted.

 

They do say: "The USB input section has its own separate power management system with multiple regulators and filtering operating from the galvanically-isolated voltage generated to power this section."

 

I would assume this helps but as you say, better off blocking the leakage currents from getting in, in the first place.

[HumanMedia]

Re: output voltage

 

Assuming that ones preamp can handle 3v input, does any particular output voltage sound better?

 

is the highest output voltage the best? (Better signal to noise?)

 

reason I ask is that in the long Watts thread at Headfi, he mentions that the Hugo output at 5V and has an advantage over the qutes outputting at a lower voltage. Can’t remember why or if it applies here, so wondering if people have any personal findings sound quality-wise with the different output voltages?

 

 

[ecwl]

 

9 hours ago, HumanMedia said:

Assuming that ones preamp can handle 3v input, does any particular output voltage sound better?

 

is the highest output voltage the best? (Better signal to noise?)

You get better signal to noise ratio because the DAC by design can put out up to around 5V and the 1V vs 2V vs 3V is a digital volume attenuation.

 

The problem is the assumption that most preamps can handle 3V input. Having encouraged a friend to buy the 2Qute and passing on my old QBD76 to another one, I'm surprised how many preamps clip a 3V input. My 2Qute friend ended up needing a 10dB RCA attenuator to get the best out of the DAC when he switched preamps. I think that's where the 1V vs 2V vs 3V preferences come from.

 

I have paired my Chord DAVE (and even Mojo) with many amps/preamps. I can tell you that the digital attenuation of Chord DAVE/Mojo is always more transparent or at least as transparent as preamps. So if you need a preamp and are buying a Qutest, I would not worry about using 1V output to match the preamp because of the lower SNR compared to 3V. Of course, if you don't need a preamp, you really should switch to a Hugo 2 over keeping your preamp for Qutest. Unless you want a preamp to warm up your sound...

[Miska]

On 8/11/2018 at 7:34 PM, Superdad said:

Just means that the USB input stage still shares the same ground domain with the computer—unless one adds a GI device before the DAC.

 

Why would that matter as long as the clock is at the DAC side? USB interface just shovels data around and clock should run at the DAC side, on the other side of the isolation barrier. That way whatever happens at the USB side doesn't matter as long as there's no data corruption.