A couple of days ago I came across a a deal on a Chord Hugo TT2 and... now I am waiting for my TT2 to go with the my M Scaler.  I had in mind to get the Dave and still likely will.  So why the TT2... because it's a sickness??

It all started with the Lumin2 Mini, Muon System, assorted cables and the Chord Qutest to see if digital and then the Chord "sound" would work for me, putting it as briefly as I can.  It did especially after I added the M Scaler, way beyond expectations.  In fact up until this experience I would not have thought that I would really get into digital.  As you can see that has all changed!

Recent discussions regarding preamps and passive volume controls got me thinking about getting and EMI.  The TT2 can drive high impedance headphones and has a preamp stage.  The Dave cannot drive high impedance  headphones.  So besides the DAC section, which is supposed to be a major jump over the Qutest, which is no slouch, I'm going to be checking out the preamp stage as well as the headphone amp in the TT2.

That should help considerably in deciding what to do next as the next steps are going to hurt... bad!

Quote:


Hey CA, Yes that is correct.  Based on my experience with the Qutest and the M Scaler, the M Scaler takes a Chord DAC to an altogether different level.  The better the DAC the greater the result, as I understand it.  

The Hugo M Scaler was physically sized to sit under the Hugo TT2.  Reportedly the combination of the two is equal to the Dave sans the M Scaler.  Add the M Scaler to the Dave and the effect it makes is greater yet according to reports.  Which goes counter to the established view, or at least my view, that the better the DAC the smaller the effect of an upscaler.

But the M Scaler is not your typical upscaling device and that I can attest to.  I never gave much credence to upscaling and became somewhat dismissive of it.  It's rather unnerving when ones long held conclusions soundly trashed.  In my case it has once again opened my thinking so that now I'm testing out that which I thought I knew and being well rewarded in the process. It's worth reading up on what the M Scaler does and Rob Watts design objectives.

Quote:

No kidding!

The interesting thing about the M Scaler is what it does and what it does is not what I heard from upscaling devices before and so its effects as an upscaler were completely, well... shocking? It makes things much more real.  Timing, transients, staging, space and position of vocalists, musicians and instruments and space between them within the stage are presented in a way that I've yet to year from a digital front end and it doesn't seem to be contrived or artificial.  It improves clarity and at the same time eliminates grain and edginess or brittleness.  Don't confuse this with "warmth" or "smoothing".  If I were to put a word on it it would "liquid" and "clean" or "clear". There's much more that I won't get into at this time.

As a result my taste now has attached many more $$$$$$$$$$ signs, 😥.  You are SO correct in your summation.