Jump to content
IGNORED

Article: Subjective: AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt Review


Recommended Posts

Thx Chris. "Bloom" is the exact impression I got from the Cobalt. I liked it. But I returned it since I have the Red. The more I listened to it, the more it seemed that it was like a different color (which it is!) more than an improvement. I am not going for a rainbow of flys, I will wait for an improved DAC (from Audioquest or someone else).

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

I have a Cobalt and have been using it mostly in a desktop setup controlled by JRiver.  JRiver enables (and requires) me to downsample higher-res files to 24-96.  I have no real complaints about the sound quality of even the downsampled files in that application.  It’s comparable to what I get through a low-end LH Labs Pulse (although the latter plays even DSD natively).

 

Just for grins, I substituted the Cobalt for my Wyred 4 Sound 10th Anniversary DAC in my main system.  The cheap cable I used with the Cobalt probably explains at least some of the difference and the Cobalt generally sounded a lot thinner than the much more expensive DAC, but, on the whole, it sounded better than anyone ought to expect from a product of that size and price.  However - and this is a big “however” - it simply couldn’t play anything beyond 24-96 using my standard DLNA player.  It stuttered through those files.  I really wouldn’t recommend the Cobalt for a streaming system if you are heavily invested in hi-res, especially when there are decent uncompromised alternatives for not much more money.

 

 I don’t enjoy headphones and despise IEM’s, but I do own some $30 wireless cans from Best Buy that I use at the gym.  My Android phone connects to them via Bluetooth and keeps me entertained with low-fi Spotify and SiriusXM.  Also for grins, I attached the Cobalt to my Samsung Galaxy 9+ with the USB-C adaptor and then connected the cheap phones via cable to the Cobalt.  I was surprised at how much better everything sounded than over Bluetooth.  I suspect that the Cobalt might be at its best when connected to a phone, making mp3’s and low-fi streams sound better.  If I had more love for headphones and listened on the mobile more often away from the gym, I would be tempted to buy a much better set of cans for this application.

The stuttering has nothing to do with the Cobalt really, more likely it is whatever is downsampling to 24/96. Frankly I don’t think any DAC below $1000 will make any difference when limited to 24/96 vs playing higher res. 

 

The Dragonflys are all at home with a mobile device, or when you’re out and about with your laptop. They are not the best you can get for the money for a desktop computer or audio system. The Cobalt in particular is truly the worst choice for use as a pure DAC at 100% volume as it introduces clipping distortion - neither the Red nor Black do this. This is the most clear statement of a flawed design in my opinion (and why I returned my Cobalt). For details see:

 

https://archimago.blogspot.com/2019/08/measurements-dragonflies-audioquest.htm

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
8 hours ago, firedog said:

 

There are certainly much better $300 DACs on the market if that's what you want. They aren't small like the Cobalt, which is why they sound better and the Cobalt is portable but not up to SQ snuff. The Cobalt is for laptop/portability use.  Miniaturization costs money.

I disagree. There’s no difference in the chips used here vs elsewhere. Yes, they designed a motherboard to house the whole thing. Big deal.

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
6 hours ago, davide256 said:

pretty happy with the iSine 10s that come with Cipher DAC lightning cable and regular headphone cables. Add in the Audeze equalization app and Qobuz sounds really good.

Less "spaghetti" is nice but I can see where if you needed noise blocking earphones, the Dragonfly Cobalt might have a place

Red. Save $100 and do better.

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
5 hours ago, firedog said:

The DAC chip is  a physically tiny part, and is irrelevant to what I wrote.
 

Yes, there is cost involved in getting a complete component built into such a small package. It's pretty basic - designing something very small that does pretty much everything that something larger does  with good quality off the shelf parts is almost always more difficult and more expensive.  It's true across the board in electronics.

 

DAC designers will tell you the chip is a very small part of the resulting sound. Two DACs with 2 different chips inside  from different companies can be made to sound alike.  Things like the PS and the analog output section make bigger differences. There are other, bigger $300 DACs on the market that measure MUCH better than the Dragonfly, and in all likelihood sound better. Those designers have fewer design constraints imposed on them by size and a lot more design options for problem solving. Easier to have quality power, shielding, internal isolation, etc. So they have an easier time getting good results if that's what they are trying for. 

The reason d'etre  for the Dragonfly is size and apparently Audioquest  is willing to compromise the results to get there, b/c they couldn't do better at their price points in that size format. They are using a high quality DAC chip, so why can't they get the results that other, better performing DACs do? Designers of desktop or tabletop DACs don't have that size excuse to fall back on, have many more directly competing models, and need to have better results if they want to compete. 

Agree, but the vast majority of the design of the board was already done with the multiple versions of the DFs. Justifying $100 for basically the same - and then botched in my opinion - design is a little bit “funny”. 

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...