Hi @RobWatts, first of all, I'm a big fan of Chord DACs and you and your skills (I have a 2qute and a Qutest). But in case of R2R DACs I think you made a mistake in thinking (presentation slide in video at 31:35). "Matching of resistors is a major issue - for 144 dB distortion, we need 0.000006% accuracy which is impossible". In "absolute resolution" you are right. In 24 bits, the lowest bit has such a value, but in a R2R ladder, we have a "relative accuracy". Every ladder-step halves the voltage, so the voltage of the lowest bit is 0.06 microvolt (for max output 1V). But the accuracy of this voltage is (e.g. we have 1% resistors) is 0.06 microvolt +-0.0006 microvolt (+-1%). The 1% accuracy of the resistor is "relative to the voltage of the ladder-step", not "absolute to the max output". Anyway, I think there are very, very good R2R DACs existing (e.g. "Denafrips Terminator"), so the "0.000006% accuracy" can't be really a "major issue" ;-) Thanks Rob for your fantastic skills and thanks that you share your knowledge with us. Regards Tom
A used Mojo for $300ish is possibly the best money you can spend in audio. That is, of course, if you are not an 'analogue only' person. Use as a DAC only, drive almost any headphone properly, portable ... and of course, sounds great. Certainly some of the best coin I've spent
No. He's referring to silicon based DSD DAC chips in how they typically function. The Directstream uses an FPGA (like the DAVE) and a uniquely designed digital board to overcome the issues he's referring to. The noise floor with the current Red Cloud firmware for the DS is very close to DAVE. Both are state of the art DACs but offer some unique things the other does not. It's not a contest, as there is no such thing as a perfect DAC, but rather a choice to be made based on what one appreciates in their sound, budget, system synergy and feature set they're looking for.
Was ist wenn zwischen zwei Stücken eine kurze Pause ist dann beinflussen die Millionen Taps Musikstücke die miteinander nichts zu tun haben. Habe ich das richtig verstanden?
The big problem with Rob Watts' conclusions is that he does not do blind A/B tests. His conclusions are all subjective, and as such are not repeatable or provable.
Very interesting video. Ofcourse it's a marketing gag. But he gives some nice information about what is "not so perfect" with the often called "perfect digital" sound. I realy would like to hear what he has to say about MQA or class-D amps.
@@jaapaap5 Even though I agree with you in your response when you say that your first comment has nothing to do with speakers (or motor bikes, for that matter), I cannot agree with you in one thing: digital storage media are NOT perfect. Nothing made by humans is, so far. That statement has been just a commercial claim from the very beginning to attract clients, but nothing more. A different question is if digital is inherently superior to analogue, and the answer is "YES!".
I bought dave , compare it to my msb Reference DAC for 2 weeks , to be honest in my set up in both speaker and headphones . The Reference is more like you are there like really life like sound ,while dave is close but tbh I can't say it sould like real life .still remain in digital domain like all other dacs I 've tried before .
I think he did said it wrong here (th-cam.com/video/BXyjsSYjnL8/w-d-xo.html) he should say "DXD modulator" instead he said "DSD modulator". "DXD/PDM modulator" - jumps from one value to other without strong filtration (has external interpolation filter). "DSD modulator" - makes filtration via build-in integrator block to approximate to sine wave function
Andreas Tzimboukakis That’s quite expensive, consider it’s more expensive than mojo itself. But does UPnP sound better than direct USB connection(with a good cable)?
Holy Schiit! Dave is the Schiit. But is this just a bunch of happy horse Schiit? How come no one in the world except this guy's son claims to hear a 150 dB noise floor?
@@humanbass Right. He must say "any audible distortion is measurable", not the inverse, which isn't necessarily true. Weird assumption (it's supposed he does not assumptions), coming from a veteran audio-electronics engineer.
Rob Watts claims that he is obsessed with getting both the numbers and measurements right. In that case, we should all be asking: What have you been measuring if you claim that we can hear the difference? In other words, you cannot improve upon something unless you can measure it. Even if what he claims (more musicality, depth, timbre, etc.) were true, as an engineer, he must know what contributes to it. Otherwise, he is aiming in the dark every time he designs something new, unless he is deliberately keeping a major secret to himself regarding audio perception that no one has ever decoded thus far, of which I am very skeptical.
I like both analogue and digital. They sound 'different'. One is not 'better' ... just better for 'you'. So you officially do not win the 'best' comment.
Too many bold claims that needs some scientific scrutiny. Not saying Chord products aren't great, but he talks in a way that not only humans have a crazy super hearing, but also the speakers/phones are also able to easily pick up every nano inch of distortion.
Also, microphones and A to D converters have higher distortion levels than -350 db. In his talk, mentioned a 19kHz 20kHz dual tone distortion rate of -115 db. Not only is this the objectionable 'inharmonic distortion', it's way higher than the -350 db noise level.
CD is just low rez. It's pretty clear on a good system. The problem is they can't sell any other digital. They have ruined that market for music. Oh well.
Well, if you haven't listened to the PS Audio DSD DAC, then I understand your feelings. This unit took my system 'there', and the audionervosa has disintegrated. :)
My personal opinion is that analog is superior for being a more "natural" process, whilst in digital we fight against something that is inherently computer-like in its workings as we try to adapt a "natural" process to "non-natural" procedures of a different essence, that's the idea (like fitting a circle to a square). Nonetheless, any categorical statements making use of expressions like "it's always so", "it's always been", "it'll ever be", etc., are doomed to failure as each particular case is related to very local and specific situations. Seeing that the researcher/lecturer himself expresses his sincere difficulty in determining where exactly problems lie, it's hard for any of us devoid of sophisticated labs and facilities to make definite assumptions. But my ears tell me that digital still has many miles to cover in order to truly compare with analog, though I appreciate the fluid and warm character eventually found in the best digital.
I think you need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Considering the performance of his circuits, I think he has earned the privilege of being a true expert and not a snake-oil salesman. If a circuit designer perceives shortcomings in the designs of his competition, and if he has made deliberate moves to avoid these same pitfalls, then in order to talk about his own product he would necessarily have to talk about the problems he found in the products of his competition. To fully define a thing, you must talk about its antithesis, its opposite. If he is right and his product is better than the competition, and if we would have him avoid any speech that is not self-serving we would doom him to silence.
@@phototristan Well, I can. Luxman's DA-07, designed in the late '80s and just for redbook CDs mainly and down to 12 bit/32 kHz sampling rate, too. Better than any "Hi-Res" dac you can point out (DSD format included). Of course, and opposite to the lecturer, I have not the less commercial interests involved.
Exhibit A: Anonymous guy sharing his opinion in a comment via the web vs engineer that has built a business with clients and highly rated products sharing his understanding of the state of the art in DAC development.
Marketing BS! I got myself a Mojo because of these claims and is good, but not worth the money. It's not that much better than a ES100. It's better in some ways and worse in others when it comes to sound, but a DX3 Pro runs circles around it in every way for so much less.
If you can't measure the differences that you hear, then you're doing the wrong kind of measurements. Please can we get away from (subjective) listening and nail down the measurement techniques to shine a light on why something apparently sounds different. Slam the door shut on subjective variability. Pleeeeeease?
![เจ้าผู้เดียว - ดิด คิตตี้ [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q0NLCYKBOTo/mqdefault.jpg)
i am listening via a Chord Qutest. so nice!
This is one of the best and genuine speech on DAC ever listened, thanks for such upload.
Hi @RobWatts,
first of all, I'm a big fan of Chord DACs and you and your skills (I have a 2qute and a Qutest). But in case of R2R DACs I think you made a mistake in thinking (presentation slide in video at 31:35).
"Matching of resistors is a major issue - for 144 dB distortion, we need 0.000006% accuracy which is impossible". In "absolute resolution" you are right. In 24 bits, the lowest bit has such a value, but in a R2R ladder, we have a "relative accuracy". Every ladder-step halves the voltage, so the voltage of the lowest bit is 0.06 microvolt (for max output 1V). But the accuracy of this voltage is (e.g. we have 1% resistors) is 0.06 microvolt +-0.0006 microvolt (+-1%). The 1% accuracy of the resistor is "relative to the voltage of the ladder-step", not "absolute to the max output".
Anyway, I think there are very, very good R2R DACs existing (e.g. "Denafrips Terminator"), so the "0.000006% accuracy" can't be really a "major issue" ;-) Thanks Rob for your fantastic skills and thanks that you share your knowledge with us. Regards Tom
Really interesting. I want one now
27:50 The other DACs Mr Watts are referring to here are ESS Hyperstream modulators. FYI.
GREAT MAN!! I adore Chords Mojo Dac, as I just bought one and I am MIGHTILY impressed with it. This is digital done right!
A used Mojo for $300ish is possibly the best money you can spend in audio. That is, of course, if you are not an 'analogue only' person. Use as a DAC only, drive almost any headphone properly, portable ... and of course, sounds great. Certainly some of the best coin I've spent
So what he's saying is that PS Audio's directstream dac won't be able to have the same depth as Chords?
No. He's referring to silicon based DSD DAC chips in how they typically function. The Directstream uses an FPGA (like the DAVE) and a uniquely designed digital board to overcome the issues he's referring to. The noise floor with the current Red Cloud firmware for the DS is very close to DAVE. Both are state of the art DACs but offer some unique things the other does not. It's not a contest, as there is no such thing as a perfect DAC, but rather a choice to be made based on what one appreciates in their sound, budget, system synergy and feature set they're looking for.
Ps audio's directstream dac isn't as good as 200 dollar dac. It measures like shit and sound like shit.
John Yang you are not the first one saying that. I wonder what $200 DAC would you use to compete with DirectStream DAC?
Yes
@@allansh828well, he kind of designs dacs as well lmfao.
Was ist wenn zwischen zwei Stücken eine kurze Pause ist dann beinflussen die Millionen Taps Musikstücke die miteinander nichts zu tun haben. Habe ich das richtig verstanden?
Good story
The big problem with Rob Watts' conclusions is that he does not do blind A/B tests. His conclusions are all subjective, and as such are not repeatable or provable.
Very interesting video. Ofcourse it's a marketing gag. But he gives some nice information about what is "not so perfect" with the often called "perfect digital" sound.
I realy would like to hear what he has to say about MQA or class-D amps.
Cynicism is not the same as intelligence. You offer up no evidence in your condemnation of the speaker.
Cheers,
Alan Tomlinson
try reading my comment, before writing. I'm not negative about the speaker.
@@jaapaap5 Even though I agree with you in your response when you say that your first comment has nothing to do with speakers (or motor bikes, for that matter), I cannot agree with you in one thing: digital storage media are NOT perfect. Nothing made by humans is, so far.
That statement has been just a commercial claim from the very beginning to attract clients, but nothing more.
A different question is if digital is inherently superior to analogue, and the answer is "YES!".
@@venturarodriguezvallejo1567 agreed
I bought dave , compare it to my msb Reference DAC for 2 weeks , to be honest in my set up in both speaker and headphones . The Reference is more like you are there like really life like sound ,while dave is close but tbh I can't say it sould like real life .still remain in digital domain like all other dacs I 've tried before .
I think he did said it wrong here (th-cam.com/video/BXyjsSYjnL8/w-d-xo.html) he should say "DXD modulator" instead he said "DSD modulator".
"DXD/PDM modulator" - jumps from one value to other without strong filtration (has external interpolation filter).
"DSD modulator" - makes filtration via build-in integrator block to approximate to sine wave function
Can you see the depth of the emperor's new sound stage?
chord stuff measures very much not state of the art, so it's ironic that this is the guy talking about how to design a dac.
saying mojo is immune to jitter is just a utter lie cause my mojo sounds way better from a good source device than a noisy one.
Well, noise in input signal level hardly anything to do with jitter afaik.
Andreas Tzimboukakis What source do you recommend?
@@allansh828 poly
Andreas Tzimboukakis That’s quite expensive, consider it’s more expensive than mojo itself. But does UPnP sound better than direct USB connection(with a good cable)?
@@allansh828 there is a sound quality improvement, but it also makes mojo much more portable and easy to use with ur phone and other devices
Holy Schiit! Dave is the Schiit. But is this just a bunch of happy horse Schiit? How come no one in the world except this guy's son claims to hear a 150 dB noise floor?
Is this a sales guy talking to audiophiles?
He's Chord's head digital engineer and designer. He has been working as a DAC design for multiple clients for decades.
He sounds like a salesman pandering to his audience.
Chris Hill by definition, how is he pandering?
You should read his posts on HeadFi, much more in depth but also more condensed technical information.
"Saying that any measurable distortion is audible" is a very, very bold claim to make without any scientific research.
@@humanbass Right. He must say "any audible distortion is measurable", not the inverse, which isn't necessarily true.
Weird assumption (it's supposed he does not assumptions), coming from a veteran audio-electronics engineer.
That is some serious bull being spread there ...
+1 bro, this is utter BULLSHIT.
Examples?
That's funny. The noise level of hugo2 is higher than asus u7.
Rob Watts claims that he is obsessed with getting both the numbers and measurements right. In that case, we should all be asking: What have you been measuring if you claim that we can hear the difference? In other words, you cannot improve upon something unless you can measure it. Even if what he claims (more musicality, depth, timbre, etc.) were true, as an engineer, he must know what contributes to it. Otherwise, he is aiming in the dark every time he designs something new, unless he is deliberately keeping a major secret to himself regarding audio perception that no one has ever decoded thus far, of which I am very skeptical.
Every manufactor should listen to this lecture no wonder all analogue sounds better digital has so many extra problems
Riiiiight ...
That guy is certainly not trying to sell you anything!
I like both analogue and digital. They sound 'different'. One is not 'better' ... just better for 'you'. So you officially do not win the 'best' comment.
@@fredpasta6488 all sounds are analogue soundwave...
You never heard 0 and 1 in your life.
Too many bold claims that needs some scientific scrutiny. Not saying Chord products aren't great, but he talks in a way that not only humans have a crazy super hearing, but also the speakers/phones are also able to easily pick up every nano inch of distortion.
Also, microphones and A to D converters have higher distortion levels than -350 db.
In his talk, mentioned a 19kHz 20kHz dual tone distortion rate of -115 db. Not only is this the objectionable 'inharmonic distortion', it's way higher than the -350 db noise level.
Dave sounds too thin and so does pretty much every chord dac. Not a good combo with super high resolution bright headphones.
In another 50 years it will match analog.......................
UberPilot That’s so ridiculous. Digital already sounds better. Sure, you need a good DAC, but your statement is based on nothing but personal bias.
Not on my setup. I have maybe three red book CDs that sound good.
CD is just low rez. It's pretty clear on a good system. The problem is they can't sell any other digital. They have ruined that market for music. Oh well.
Well, if you haven't listened to the PS Audio DSD DAC, then I understand your feelings. This unit took my system 'there', and the audionervosa has disintegrated. :)
My personal opinion is that analog is superior for being a more "natural" process, whilst in digital we fight against something that is inherently computer-like in its workings as we try to adapt a "natural" process to "non-natural" procedures of a different essence, that's the idea (like fitting a circle to a square). Nonetheless, any categorical statements making use of expressions like "it's always so", "it's always been", "it'll ever be", etc., are doomed to failure as each particular case is related to very local and specific situations. Seeing that the researcher/lecturer himself expresses his sincere difficulty in determining where exactly problems lie, it's hard for any of us devoid of sophisticated labs and facilities to make definite assumptions. But my ears tell me that digital still has many miles to cover in order to truly compare with analog, though I appreciate the fluid and warm character eventually found in the best digital.
Schiit Audio 'Modi' DAC is only $99 in America. Yes, you can get slightly better sound for more money, but be prepared to pay at least $1000.
If you like placebo that you can't differenciate in a blind test, sure.
There's even 20k DAC if you want, lol.
@@hypnoz7871 There are better DACs out there, but the rest of your system has to be very good as well. Your Logitech speakers do not apply.
stop deleting any usefull feedback
Hey Joppe, big long time fan of yours, never commented. What is your take on this?
These generalizations about r2r DACs are just that, and coming from him, seem quite self-serving.
Can you point to any r2r DAC where his 'generalizations' are not actually true?
I think you need to give him the benefit of the doubt. Considering the performance of his circuits, I think he has earned the privilege of being a true expert and not a snake-oil salesman. If a circuit designer perceives shortcomings in the designs of his competition, and if he has made deliberate moves to avoid these same pitfalls, then in order to talk about his own product he would necessarily have to talk about the problems he found in the products of his competition. To fully define a thing, you must talk about its antithesis, its opposite. If he is right and his product is better than the competition, and if we would have him avoid any speech that is not self-serving we would doom him to silence.
@@phototristan Well, I can.
Luxman's DA-07, designed in the late '80s and just for redbook CDs mainly and down to 12 bit/32 kHz sampling rate, too.
Better than any "Hi-Res" dac you can point out (DSD format included).
Of course, and opposite to the lecturer, I have not the less commercial interests involved.
Exhibit A: Anonymous guy sharing his opinion in a comment via the web vs engineer that has built a business with clients and highly rated products sharing his understanding of the state of the art in DAC development.
Marketing BS!
I got myself a Mojo because of these claims and is good, but not worth the money. It's not that much better than a ES100. It's better in some ways and worse in others when it comes to sound, but a DX3 Pro runs circles around it in every way for so much less.
If you can't measure the differences that you hear, then you're doing the wrong kind of measurements. Please can we get away from (subjective) listening and nail down the measurement techniques to shine a light on why something apparently sounds different.
Slam the door shut on subjective variability. Pleeeeeease?
All DACs sound the same
No they do not. Absolutely not.