@hells Agree (again) I auditioned a CHORD Hugo (the 1st) against a CHORD QBD76 HDSD… the Hugo has more taps and some better specs yet was no match for the QBD which was clear a winner (not night/day). I still performed an A/B blind, yet the winner was clear = QBD better input/output stages won the day… and CHORD stilled called the ‘QBD reference’ while the press called the ‘Hugo Reference!’ if memory severs me best?
1 Like
@dannybgoode … Interesting comparisons, emerging from this short thread is reinforcing the bang for buck in modern day DAC and your friends view “… It’s quite hard to make a really bad DAC these days…”
Danny, as stated above (I still keep in my office and use an old Marantz CDR630 (throw a CD in&go)circa 1998 with the Philips TDA 1305T DAC chip as used in the NAIM CD5. The CDR630 is a Pro player … Still sounds sweet …]
Sparks an interest into what increased gaps the likes of DAVE, dCS, Naim etc give.
So, there are many good DAC’s yet better implemented DAC’s have the advantage, supporting the 20 year old older DAC well implemented can still be a force.
Indeed. You mentioned perhaps buying a Chi-fi special hence my comment on the D50S which is exactly that. Nice thing, really is. Up against my Naim it comes very close in most areas and even betters it in places.
But then as we both know the older DACs still perform extremely well. Measurements have some use but with DACs most of them, even the vintage ones, measure far beyond what is audible so they become a bit of a needless contest.
I like talking to my friend about such things as he comes from a purely technical background with little interest in hifi as such but understands what influences audio in the digital domain and can discuss it without any emotional attachment to a brand or music in general 
1 Like
Mine is still in (almost) daily use 
3 Likes
I like my 20 (30?) years old Audio Note DAC with DAC chip from even longer before with tubes that are from the 80s than the latest DACs. sometimes newer is not better!
2 Likes