Hi everyone,
I am faced with a great doubt. source.
last week I had the pleasure of listening to Aurender A10 on my 282/300 system.
I was really fascinated because the combination was excellent.
however I have read many reviews about the brand chord DAC and the FGPA microchip feature.
now I’m undecided whether to try the Chord Qutest or stay on the Aurender A10.
has anyone tried these two combinations on a system similar to mine?
thank you.
One is as sever/streamer with built in DAC. The other is a standalone DAC. What would your source be if you had the Chord?
Also, how important is Tidal MQA to you? Accessible via the Aurender only?
Chord qutest for sure
Sorry ,
I’m going to use Mac as streamer , then a reclocker, and Qutest as dac.
Thank you.
Do you think that a device of 1200£ can sound better than the Aurender A10 that cost around 4 times more?
Yes I’m quite sure
Ignore chord at the peril of your own wallet
Good morning,
it’s very interesting because I’ve read about the Chord microchip and it definitely has to be something innovative.
I’ve never tried it until now.
And with a final as important as the 300, I doubt that perhaps a qutest can be a bit small as a source.
I found an A10 at a good price but I’m curious and therefore also undecided, that’s why I created this topic.
did you have the opportunity to listen to the same system with these two different sources?
thank you
Yes
Your money your choice
Which was the streamer with in your case?
Thank you.
the chord in my many test performs very well with Naim ND5XS2 and NDX2.
I would suggest that there is no single correct answer to your question.
The popularity of Chord DACs with Naim system users started with the Hugo. A few people liked it so much that they sold their NDAC/555 despite a bigger price difference than between the Aurender and Qutest, and it doesn’t include a streamer.
Personally I thought the Hugo was good, but not that good, although I don’t doubt the opinions of those who liked it so much.
Ultimately there are differences between these sources that cannot simply be defined as better or worse, just different, and if you want to discover which you prefer you will only find out by listening for yourself.
the Hugo was good, as the first of the new generation of the Chord DACs, but the Dave simply outclassed it in every way - but it should as it comes with a price increase.
even with the DAVE, the signal quality does vary a bit with the streamer used, but I found best results with the new Naim streamers.
Goodmorning
The last listen I did was:
mac, Dac V1, 282/300
and,
Aurender A10, 282/300.
The aurender sounded better, the sound was more out, more precise, more real.
no one could claim to have preferred the Mac / V1 source.
I read Martin Colloms’ review in which he claims that the Aurender A10 with the Nap 300 is a fantastic combination. however I was intrigued by the reviews and videos on the qutest chord. which I have no way to test on my system.
that’s why I’m asking these things.
thank you.
Curiosity kills the wallet of an audiophile
I found the DAC V1 to be an awesome source
Maybe the settings on your Mac are not optimized?
Hi, what do you mean by not optimized? I used Audirvana with ripped file from CDs and then TIDAL.
The difference with Aureder A10 was very clear.
which USB cable? the DAC V1 has built capability to tell you that the signal from the MAC is bit perfect or not. did you run the files and confirm the V1 was receiving bit perfect
I did, and found the DAC V1 to be really superb. At the time I could only keep the Hugo or the DAC v1, and still till today with some sadness I remember letting go of the DAC v1. I remember it fondly.
Have you considered a Naim NDX2 as a source? It’s very good, and can be further upgraded with a power supply. Some also use a separate Dac with it and seem very happy.
I appreciate that for some there is no opportunity to listen to equipment before you buy it. In the UK we are lucky that this is rarely the case. Sometimes it can make sense to buy on the second hand market so that you can assess it and then sell for little or no loss if you don’t want to keep it.
To my ears the Chord DACs seem to offer great insight into the recording, lots of detail, accuracy and a good soundstage. I haven’t heard the Aurender so I’m afraid I can’t comment on how it would compare.
I have heard, and quite liked, the Aurender. I can’t say I would say it’s miles in front of anything else. As others have observed it’s really going to be a case of suck it and see. You have referenced use of Tidal. As already observed that would take the Qutest out of the equation regardless of other differences if you wanted MQA.
FWIW I auditioned a Qutest on the front of an Innuos Zenith 3 and an NDX2 and the whole family found it incredibly detailed but far too much in your face. These comments are of course entirely subjective but for context I previously owned and loved a first generation CDX2 and XPS2 which is probably as in your face as classic series Naim ever got. Nevertheless I ended up with a Chord DAC in the Hugo TT2. Just as much detail but much more relaxed.
Yes, I’ve tried it, but I like better the Aurender A10 as a source. I was wondering if someone has ever listen on a 250 or 300 both the Aurender A10 and the Qutest.