Article: Objective: AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt Review

[mansr]

View full article

[Hugo9000]

Thank you @The Computer Audiophile and @mansr, it's nice to have measurements and objective analysis of the performance of equipment on this site.  I especially like that Mans has delved just enough into each measurement and its significance for a layman to understand why these parameters matter, and what effects they have on the signal, without bogging down the review with a lengthy dissertation on each item.  Very nice balance, I feel, and enough detail to guide further searches for information if one is so inclined yet lacks the background.

[Archimago]

Nice work @mansr 😁.

 

Looks like the one I tried out a month back with the high distortion and THD comparable to the Black wasn't just a "one off" defective device after all...

[Matias]

SMSL Idea or Sabaj DA2 are a lot better value.

[Superdad]

Nicely written.  Clear, concise, and educational. 

[wgscott]

Nice presentation. I especially appreciated the introductory paragraph for each measurement, explaining the meaning and significance, as well as the basis for what was being measured.

 

I would love to see more of this sort of thing.

[The Computer Audiophile]

17 minutes ago, wgscott said:

I would love to see more of this sort of thing.

I'd love to publish more of this as well. 

[wgscott]

@mansr

 

Looking at the frequency response curves for 44.1 and 96kHz, at 20Hz, the first one is down about -5.5 dB, whereas the second one is down about -0.4 dB.  (Let's assume the youthful audiophile listener hears music at 20Hz, for simplicity).  Would this DAC therefore give the impression that it could resolve details from a 24/96kHz recording that it would be able to for a 16/44.1 recording?

 

The reason I ask it because if the above is right, it would suggest that higher resolution might sound better than redbook on a DAC like this, not because it is of superior quality, but rather, the opposite.

[Ralf11]

Great Review!

[Dr Tone]

@mansr any experience with the Red in comparison to the Black and Cobalt?

[mansr]

22 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Looking at the frequency response curves for 44.1 and 96kHz, at 20Hz, the first one is down about -5.5 dB, whereas the second one is down about -0.4 dB.  (Let's assume the youthful audiophile listener hears music at 20Hz, for simplicity).  Would this DAC therefore give the impression that it could resolve details from a 24/96kHz recording that it would be able to for a 16/44.1 recording?

Did you mean unable? It's a possibility, though I haven't personally tested it, and I can't hear anything above about 16 kHz anyway.

[mansr]

16 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

@mansr any experience with the Red in comparison to the Black and Cobalt?

I only have the Black and Cobalt. @Archimago's testing suggests that the Red has superior distortion figures while the Cobalt has slightly lower noise.

[firedog]

Interesting that Chris' subjective listening also concluded that SQ wise, there wasn't any substantial reason to buy the new, more expensive Dragonfly.

[wgscott]

35 minutes ago, mansr said:

Did you mean unable? It's a possibility, though I haven't personally tested it, and I can't hear anything above about 16 kHz anyway.

 

I did. (The worst thing is I edited that and de-corrected it.)

 

It is more of a hypothetical question.  The usual assumption is that if one cannot hear a difference between redbook and high-res, it is because the cheapskate was unwilling to spend a large sum of money on a better, more resolving DAC.

 

However, these test results show a measurable difference in the (potentially) audible range in the frequency response curves, which got me to thinking that maybe the ability to hear differences is dependent upon having defective audio equipment, rather than more resolving equipment.

[mansr]

55 minutes ago, wgscott said:

It is more of a hypothetical question.  The usual assumption is that if one cannot hear a difference between redbook and high-res, it is because the cheapskate was unwilling to spend a large sum of money on a better, more resolving DAC.

 

However, these test results show a measurable difference in the (potentially) audible range in the frequency response curves, which got me to thinking that maybe the ability to hear differences is dependent upon having defective audio equipment, rather than more resolving equipment.

In matters such as this, I tend to regard resolving as synonymous with defective.

[FredericV]

Interesting read, and very well written for those with a technical background.

The price of your scope looks impressive:

https://www.distrelec.be/fr/oscilloscope-4x-500mhz-5gsps-tektronix-mdo3054-mdo3sa-mdo3bnd-promo/p/30018059

[miguelito]

4 hours ago, FredericV said:

Interesting read, and very well written for those with a technical background.

The price of your scope looks impressive:

https://www.distrelec.be/fr/oscilloscope-4x-500mhz-5gsps-tektronix-mdo3054-mdo3sa-mdo3bnd-promo/p/30018059

That's what like... The price of a clock for your DAC?

 

[jzahr]

Thanks Mansr for the review.

My question is: is this device an improvement over the typical integrated audio output of a laptop (regarding measurements)?

 

Is there any objective reason to use the DF cobalt with a MacBook Pro or some decent android phone already equipped with analog outs?

 

Thanks again,

Jorge

[miguelito]

Thx @mansr. Great stuff.

[mansr]

8 hours ago, jzahr said:

My question is: is this device an improvement over the typical integrated audio output of a laptop (regarding measurements)?

 

Is there any objective reason to use the DF cobalt with a MacBook Pro or some decent android phone already equipped with analog outs?

The noise level is a little lower than many other devices, though most are already well below what's audible. If you have high impedance, low efficiency headphones you may need the higher than average voltage delivered by the Red/Cobalt, at least if you like to play loud. With a headphone impedance below about 40 Ω, the Black actually delivers higher power. The distortion is somewhat worse than average for half-way decent devices, though again not bad enough to be audible, at least not with normal music. I could not in good conscience advise anyone to buy the Cobalt.

[audiobomber]

Is the "subjective and objective" review a one-off, or can we expect more in the future? I am highly anticipating Chris' review of the DDP-2, and a technical review by mansr would be most welcome too. 

[audiobomber]

On 8/29/2019 at 11:55 AM, Matias said:

SMSL Idea or Sabaj DA2 are a lot better value.

My Da2 was a nice little DAC for as long as it lasted, which was just barely beyond the warranty period. I replaced it with an ExtremPro X1, which my laptop sometimes calls a Dragonfly Black 1.2. I don't know whether the X1 or Da2 sounds better  because I never had both together, but given the price difference, I would not recommend Sabaj.

https://www.amazon.com/XtremPro-X1-1-Performance-Headphone-Amplifier/dp/B07P6SYQG9

 

[jzahr]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

The noise level is a little lower than many other devices, though most are already well below what's audible. If you have high impedance, low efficiency headphones you may need the higher than average voltage delivered by the Red/Cobalt, at least if you like to play loud. With a headphone impedance below about 40 Ω, the Black actually delivers higher power. The distortion is somewhat worse than average for half-way decent devices, though again not bad enough to be audible, at least not with normal music. I could not in good conscience advise anyone to buy the Cobalt.

Thanks.

US$299 seems a lot to me for a device that doesn't seem to provide significantly better performance.

[mansr]

27 minutes ago, jzahr said:

US$299 seems a lot to me for a device that doesn't seem to provide significantly better performance.

Exactly.

[Richard Dale]

1 hour ago, jzahr said:

Thanks.

US$299 seems a lot to me for a device that doesn't seem to provide significantly better performance.

Yes, I can see why Audioquest would replace the Red with the Cobalt for the same price, but charging 100 dollars more when the difference appears to be technological advancement rather than the extra cost of manufacture doesn’t seem to be good value.