Article: My Quest for a New DAC, Part 5: Chord Electronics Hugo M Scaler & Hugo TT 2

[austinpop]

View full article

[austinpop]

2 minutes ago, ray-dude said:

Welcome to the Chord family Rajiv!  We'll get you a DAVE soon

 

I'm afraid I can't do (afford) that DAVE...

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, rando said:

I know before asking this is an unfair question. Of the headphones that were assembled was there any "gosh, if I could" or did your ears stay true to the nodded HD800?  

 

Evaluation in progress. Stay tuned for my high-end headphone roundup article coming out soon.

[austinpop]

5 minutes ago, chrille said:

 PS How does Vänskä's 24/96  Mahler 2 compare to Fischer's on Channel or MTT's on SFS, musically and SQ wise in your opinion?

 

I would say Vänskä is #3 in my list of Mahler 2nd, both in terms of performance and SQ. #1 is the Kaplan/Vienna Phil on DG (DSD), #2 is SFS/MTT, also on DSD.

 

For those scratching their heads, DG == Deutsche Gramaphon, SFS == San Francisco Symphony, MTT == Michael Tilson-Thomas.  

 

5 minutes ago, chrille said:

With BIS's Sibelius series  from the same venue/orchestra  M Scaler makes a BIG difference,basically  turning them from already very good to basically SOTA 24/96 PCM imho.

 

The Vänskä Sibelius cycle on BIS is head and shoulders the best SIbelius cycle I've heard.

[austinpop]

 

50 minutes ago, ted_b said:

Rajiv,

As others have already said, this review (and the review cycle in general) is a model for what audio reviews should include.  It is also gave me, personally, a real benchmark for any additional reviews I would do in the future (when my system is back up).  As some may know, I have reviewed (very positively) Chord products in the past, have a good relationship with Rob Watts, yet have not listened to their offerings in a couple years.  This review got my Chord-ism rekindled.   

 

Thanks!

 

50 minutes ago, ted_b said:

Regarding the M Scaler vs HQP, I am VERY interested in someone doing some relatively equivalent comparisons.  Whereas I trust Rob's heightened approach to "temporal coherence" and his focus on noise floor modulation, I also respect Jussi's software-based approaches to filters, modulators and letting the DAC do as little heavy lifting as possible, given the price/performance of massive hardware/software vs the $5 upsampling chips in most dacs.  The relevance of a comparison between these two SOTA approaches (M Scaler and HQP) seems to be a no-brainer.  Anyone?

 

 

While it seems simple, try defining an experiment where these are the only independent variables!

 

Both approaches are tied to DACs that are conducive to their scaling. I've tried HQPlayer with DACs that didn't benefit at all, although I readily believe others who say it helps with certain DACs. Similarly M Scaler really works best with Chord DACs with the 2-stage WTA architecture.

 

 

I'd say the only way to compare is to assemble an entire digital chain, from music server to DAC, and compare the entire chains.

 

 

[austinpop]

2 hours ago, chrille said:

Hello austinpop, 

and thanks for your rapid response.

I think I 'll stick with the ones I have .

Vänskä's Mahler recordings  from Minnesota have received   quite mixed responses from some reviewers and I am not really in desperate need of another M2.

 

From a performance perspective I prefer Fischer's  M2 from Budapest on Channel Classics and it is also  a  good native  DSD 64 recording.  Jared Sacks balances very naturally and realistically compared to DGG's normal  style of a bit  too much of  multimiking. Kaplan's  VPO M2 though available as SACD in DSD is actually a native  24/96 PCM recording. Quite good by DGG standards ,but at least via my SACD players not as good as Channel Classics M2 on SACD. Or for that matter  when played as DSD 64 download via Q/HMS.

Via my home system I can play the channel M2 louder without congestion than the DGG/ Kaplan which has a tendency to congest and harden a bit  at climaxes  via my electrostatic speakers.

But the Channel Classics M2  sounds really impressive at  very loud levels too.

But I may change my mind on the Kaplan one  if I get to hear it in its native 24/96 version via M Scaler.

I'll start by playing the rbcd layer of my SACD via M Scaler  when I get home again to hear how that fares. And if it sounds good enough I may go for the 24/96 download.

Good as 16/44.1 can sound via M Scaler it is still not hi res imho.

M Scaler has changed my opinion of the SQ levels  on quite a few recordings. Mainly for the better. But not always. Revealing as it is,it can also make  the bad aspects of a recording  more noticable. 

 

PS a bit OT maybe but how did you like the Maggie 3.7s?

 

IMHO Maggies can sometimes  be a very  good alternative to large electrostatics for large scale symphonic music.

Enjoy your TT2 /M Scaler Cheers Chrille

 

I just haven't heard Fischer's 2nd, although if his monumental 3rd (which I bought in DXD) is any indicator, it will surely be great. I'll give it a listen.

 

The Maggie 3.7s are not mine, but my friend's. He has taken great care to set them up, with proper positioning and room treatments. They are stunning for the price! Especially when matched with good electronics like the Ref 6 and Hegel power amp.

[austinpop]

2 hours ago, str-1 said:

Excellent review, Rajiv.

 

Thanks,

 

2 hours ago, str-1 said:

As an owner of both M Scaler and TT2 I was particularly interested in your comments on use of the SR7.  I was not surprised by your findings with the TT2 given the role of the super-capacitors but was interested to learn how important running the SR7 at 15V was to getting a significant bump in performance with the M Scaler.  You didn't mention so I guess you did not try the SR4 used elsewhere in your chain, but from your experience would you hazard a guess that it (the 5V-12V version) probably wouldn't deliver a significant improvement over the supplied smps?  I wonder if the 9V-19V version might be a better bet, but probably too soon for anyone to be able to try that.

 

Yes, after my finding with 12V robbing dynamics, I didn't' even bother with the SR-4 set at 12V. I would love to know what the 19V version of the SR-4 (set to 15V) would sound like.

 

2 hours ago, str-1 said:

Also, I take from your equipment list that you used the Cardas Clear with the M Scaler's smps.  If that was the case, did you notice an appreciable difference compared to the supplied power cable?  I'm wondering if this would be a better and cheaper way for many to further raise the M Scaler's performance.

 

No, actually I used the supplied power cable. The SMPS for the HMS and TT2 has a 2-pin C7 input, and all my power cables are the standard IEC. Good question - hard to say.

[austinpop]

2 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

An excellent review @austinpop. So clearly presented, with all the comparison information one could wish for.

 

I've had my own HMS for a few weeks now (added to DAVE) and my own thoughts broadly agree with yours. In particular:

 

1. The quality of source and all upstream components still matters.

 

2. My single rail SR7 (set to 15v)  gave an incremental improvement, in paricular giving a more natural presentation over stock power supply, which in comparison sounded a bit "etched".

 

3. Tweaking the stock BNC cables gave incremental improvements: With only one cable connected at a time (i.e. not using the full 1M taps), I tried multiple clip-on ferrites (17) and JSSG 360. They were both better than stock, but I couldn't decide which was best, but it didn't matter because of the next change:

 

4. After some research and PMs, I tried a pair of Blaxius^2D BNCs as being a relatively low cost upgrade (around 250 Euro each + VAT in EU countries). I'm nowhere near the allegedly 150 hour burnin required for these, but even from the first day I was taken aback by the improvement they gave. My subjective initial reaction was that they doubled the improvement given by the stock HMS. One of those "Whoa, I didn't see that coming!" moments. I'll report back after some more burn-in when I'm out of the honeymoon period.

 

So I'm curious how the Blaxius would compare to the other cables you tested. Any chance you could get a set to review?

I've been following the Habst reviews with interest, but they are just soooo expensive.

 

One word of warning is that the Blaxius is thick and very stiff, with a large radius of curvature, so choosing the right length is important.

 

 

As I wrote, my intent was just to see how much impact, if any, different BNC cables made between HMS and TT2. Being an owner of both Lush and Lush^2 cable, I know how good Peter's cables can sound. I'd certainly like to try the Blaxius^2's at some point.

[austinpop]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

Hey Rajiv,

 

Thanks for the very informative and in depth review.  I have not heard the TT2 myself, so my main reference for Chord DACs is DAVE, which (like most) I like very, very much.  It is good to know that the TT2 gets close to that level of performance, and also to know how good it is at driving (even demanding) headphones directly.  I am not surprised that you found some improvement with a good linear power supply, I designed a linear supply for my Brother's Qutest, and he notes increased smoothness and better dynamic shadings with it versus the OE switcher.

Also, thanks for reminding me about the Gorecki #3, I had forgotten about this wonderful piece of music and ordered up a DSD (SACD) version last night.

 

Best,

 

Barrows

 

I have this DSD version: http://lipinskisound.com/products/sacd-lrf-105-gorecki-/ which was conducted by Górecki himself. Unfortunately this version appears to be out of print, but if you can find it, I recommend it.

[austinpop]

The other thing I tried in this review was to publish a playlist on Qobuz of the tracks mentioned in the review, along with others I listened to in the course of the evaluation. Please let me know if you were able to access the playlist, and if helped with the review.

[austinpop]

17 minutes ago, Superdad said:

(And this was really two product reviews, so I hope Chris paid you double...)

 

Now why didn't I think of that! 😛

[austinpop]

17 hours ago, med_designer said:

austinpop -

 

By chance did you use the M Scaler with another DAC that does not support the Dual BNC configuration for the much higher sample rates and taps. I have a Mac D1100 and love it. Mostly use the proprietary DIN cable for CDs and SACDs. However, the potential to upscale to 384 could be something that might be worth a try.  This would mean my SACDs would still use the DIN, but the PCM would use SPDIF/BNC. 

 

Thoughts or suggestions? BTW, very nice review. Thanks for your efforts.

 

Hi,

 

If you look back at my review, I did in fact try connecting the M-Scaler with a single BNC cable to the QX-5 Twenty. But the QX-5, and most DACs I'm familiar with will only accept a max of 192 kHz on the S/PDIF BNC input, not 384 kHz. So you only get the benefit of 1/4 million taps.

[austinpop]

6 hours ago, Confused said:

I actually wondered the same thing as @med_designer .  In your review you mentioned that the QX-5 "sounded wonderful" with the HMS, but then said the improvement did not justify the price.  OK, I get the point that you are only getting 1/8th of the one million taps, so the value for money aspect is clearly diminished, but would I be correct in concluding that the improvement with the HMS was marginal at best?  Or to put it another way, if you loved your current 24/192 capable DAC but as ever would like to squeeze out that extra bit of performance, might the HMS be worth a try?  Or is this a case of it better to save the cash or spend it elsewhere?  I know it is impossible to say for sure without trying with a specific DAC / system, I was just wondering what your thoughts might be regarding this?

 

Great review, by the way.🙂

 

3 hours ago, med_designer said:

Yes - similar followup question to @Confused - My D1100 would support up to 384kHz single BNC so I would think there would be some improvements but clearly not those found using it as a. "system", which for me is an entire McIntosh stack. In this case, the analog side of things plays a major role in the over sound just as we see in @austinpop review of the Chord units working together.

 

Would be nice to try with a loaner if possible. However, if you know your system needs attention in other areas, that might be the better buy. I think I am just about done and thinking of a new Audi A7  - but that is another forum. 😀

 

Those are tough questions, and impossible to answer. The only way to really tell is to audition it in your system. Remember - I only had these units in hand for a few weeks. Despite the number of experiments I DID do, there were many others I couldn't find time to do. For example, could I get a bigger uplift in SQ with the M Scaler in a lower priced DAC, since the QX-5 is a really high-end DAC, so improving upon it is more difficult? Maybe. 

 

Also, I misspoke. At 24/192 you're getting 1/4 million taps, not 1/8 million. I'll correct the review and my posts.

[austinpop]

6 hours ago, skatbelt said:

@austinpop very, very informative. Best (worked out) review I've read on this site for a long time! I am little biased because I am a happy DAVE owner for quite some time and considering adding M-scaler technology in the near future. Question: did you try optical out from your MacBook Pro > optical in HMS? I think I've read somewhere that this is Rob Watt's preferred connection.

 

To paraphrase the Eagles: "we haven't had that spirit Toslink here since 1969 1999!"  

 

More seriously, no I didn't try that, as I really don't use Toslink in my audio system, and I only had this combo in hand for a preciously short time. 

[austinpop]

10 hours ago, Rexp said:

Super review @austinpopIf one was to invest 10K in a digital front end, would it be best to put 5K into the source and 5K into DAC or has the HMS changed priorities for you? 

 

No, even with the HMS, the upstream transport chain is still vitally important.

[austinpop]

On 2/23/2019 at 7:55 AM, hlkaye said:

Thanks for all your hard work.  You must have suffered terribly through this ordeal.

 

Thanks for caring. I can't even begin to describe the agony I went through!

 

On 2/23/2019 at 7:55 AM, hlkaye said:

If you were forced to limit yourself to the original aim of finding a new DAC in the $5K range and had to choose one of the DACs you reviewed for a speaker based system, which one (or two) might you rank highest?

 

Well, it's a bit more than $5k, but to my ears the order would be the Chord TT 2, followed close on its heels by the Ayre QX-8. But when you're talking about this quality, they're both outstanding DACs. I'd suggest auditioning both.

[austinpop]

15 hours ago, Currawong said:

 

Rob Watts suggested that the issue with noise may not be from the PSU feeding the Chord DAC, but noise from the PSU affecting amplifiers connected. In other words, the noise was going back from the wall-wart into the amps through their power connection. However if no amp was used other than the built-in amp in the TT2, then I guess that wasn't the issue here.

 

At least in my review system, I tried both the TT2's own headphone amp and a Cavalli Liquid Gold amp. Even with the latter, the benefits of the SR-7 PSU were evident.

[austinpop]

14 hours ago, hols said:

Thank you Rajiv for a really excellent review of the HMS+TT2. Your vivid description coincides with my own impression of Chord Blu2 + Dave. 

There is one small issue that I hope I can ask for your opinion. To me DSD playback in Chord Blu2+ Dave cannot achieve the same level as PCM playback. This is because the mscaler in Blu2 will convert the DSD to PCM before upscaling to 705.6 or 768 and pass to Dave(or TT2) . I saw that you mentioned playing DSD from HMS to TT2 using improved DSD filters. Does that mean that there is new programming that DSD is sent as DSD intact or it still requires conversion to PCM and then upscale to 768 and then convert back to DSD ? Thanks

 

Hi @hols

 

Just to clarify, please take a look at what I wrote in the context of the Arnesen piece. I wasn't trying to compare HMS/TT2's PCM vs. DSD capabilities (I guess I could have), but rather I wanted to see whether with DSD input streams, the HMS/TT2's SQ relative to the QX-5 changed drastically. It did not. So all I can say is that the HMS's DSD filter sounds very good!

[austinpop]

On 2/23/2019 at 2:36 PM, str-1 said:

I would encourage those who get or who audition a TT 2 to also experiment with the Lo- and Hi-Gain settings using their preferred headphones.  

 

With my analytical and highly revealing Focal Utopia/Prion4 combo I can clearly hear a difference between Lo- and Hi-gain, with both Amp and DAC setting.  For me, Lo-Gain is a little lighter, more open and transparent, while Hi-Gain delivers a slightly darker, fuller and more solid sound.  These differences are less clear on my warmer HE1000v2/Lazuli Reference combo.

 

Interesting. My listening did include the Utopia on hand, along with the other headphones I mentioned.

 

I checked with Rob about what this setting does. His words:

Lo gain and hi gain just involves a relay contact - with the relay open, it defaults to hi gain; with the relay closed a resistor is placed in parallel to the feedback resistor. I do not expect this to make any significant difference to the SQ.

[austinpop]

11 hours ago, str-1 said:

No guarantees a difference will be heard by those trying this, let alone a significant difference.  These are not night and day differences by any means.

 

I would expect the level of significance to diminish, and perhaps preference to change, with warmer headphone/cable combos and with higher crossfeed and warmer filter settings (I might be wrong but I've gained the impression from reading Rob's posts over the last 2-3 years that he likes neutral to warm headphones, crossfeed set to 3, and green filter).  The difference was significant enough for me to clearly prefer Hi-Gain with both my Utopia and HE1000v2 headphones on crossfeed 0 or 1 and with the analytical filter.  I was less certain what setting I preferred with the Meze Empyrean I had on loan, which I felt benefited at times from the slightly more open and transparent, but leaner, Lo-Gain setting.

 

I first mentioned the differences I was hearing between Lo- and Hi-Gain settings on Head-fi back in October.  One or two others subsequently agreed that they were hearing the same.

 

Thanks for the observations. I'll definitely revisit this when I get the HMS/TT2.

[austinpop]

35 minutes ago, Hardinge said:

Wonderfully insightful review @austinpop. I think i'll revisit that Hugo 2 now. Wondering though if you could shed some light on the storage of your music library. I think i've read somewhere you have files stored on a NAS? Where does this fit in the chain. I assume you've found this to be better than an SSD in your server?? I'm about to build a server, hence the curiosity. 

 

Thanks.

 

As it happens, I just posted a picture of my network topology in another thread, but hopefully it’ll answe your question:

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/30376-a-novel-way-to-massively-improve-the-sq-of-computer-audio-streaming/?do=findComment&comment=942524

 

[austinpop]

11 hours ago, Bob Loblaw said:

Hi guys,

 

Judging the amp section alone, has anybody compared the TT2 to the Nelson Pass HPA-1?

 

I'm looking into the either the TT2 or a combination of Qutest + Pass for my headphone playback. I know the TT2 has more features for about $200-300 less than the Qutest/Pass combo, but cross-feed and possibly IEM playback don't matter to me really. Not counting the addition of an M Scaler, the amount of taps in the TT2 seems to be the feature the Qutest truly lacks over the TT2, at least for my intended use.

 

Have not heard the Pass amp to be honest, but since it was apparently voiced with the HD800s and LCD-X in mind (have the HD800 and LCD-XC), I am wondering if choosing a DAC/amp combo makes sense.

 

Hi Bob,

 

Sorry, I have not experienced the HPA-1, so cannot give you direct impressions.

 

That said, it would take an exceptional amp for me me to consider Qutest+amp to be a better investment than a TT2. Especially since we are talking about headphones like the HD800 and LCD-XC, which the TT-2 drives with ease. Had it been the Susvara or Abyss AB-1266 TC, which are hardwe to drive, the case for an amp would be stronger.

 

 I cannot stress strongly enough just how exceptional of a headphone amp the TT2 has. And one of the hallmarks of the TT2, like all of Rob's DACs, is the level of transparency you get from driving headphones (or indeed even high efficiency speakers) directly from the DAC.

 

I believe I elaborated on this in the review.

[austinpop]

I echo Bob and Chris's general comments above. I personally leave my digital gear on 24x7.

 

Per Rob's post on the subject:

 

But when you are in standby mode (power off on the front panel) the FPGA remains powered up all the time (so the remote still works) but the rest of the power hungry circuitry is shut down. So no FPGA boot up phase when you switch the front panel power switch.

 

A lot of people choose to put their TT2 in standby when not in use, but I belong in the "leave it on 24x7" camp. 

 

 

[austinpop]

Minnesota.