Chord Chordette 2Qute DAC - review and commentary

First, as PSA: you may find it written that there is no need to upgrade the cheapo switching power supply that ships with the Chord 2Qute.
This is a lie. Upgrading to a low noise, regulated linear power supply makes all the difference in the world.
The 12V 4A Brzhifi power supply I use is shown in the background of this photo:

While I haven't opened up the case to check, the Brzhifi power supply internals are supposed to look like this:

It's a standard extruded aluminum project box, serviceable toroidal transformer, 2x 12 VDC outputs (not independent, just two taps connected to the regulated output), power switch, and indicator light. Reassuringly the output measured 12.1 V on power up and remained 12.1 V after warm-up, unloaded, no funny business whatsoever. Whether it can meet its specified 4 A output without flaming out is an open question, but let's face it I'm not going to be putting that to the test.

The 2Qute DAC itself is at once understated and outlandish. The milled aluminum pillbox case is extremely solid and carefully finished with deeply engraved lettering on the top. At 400g, the case is heavy enough that it doesn't usually lose the fight with stiff cables. The magnifying "eye" window is centered above a single indicator LED that changes color with the sampling rate or the selected input. Speaking of inputs, there is one each coax (RCA), Toslink, and USB, switchable with a tiny button on the rear. It's easy perhaps to mock that cyclops window, but it absolutely works from an aesthetic standpoint.

Inside, it's just a small circuit board, powered by 12V DC delivered through a sleeve-type 5.5x2.1 mm power jack. What distinguishes these Chord DACs from just about all the other DACs on the market is the use of an FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) chip instead of an off-the-shelf, purpose-built DACs from AKM, Wolfson, ESS &c. An FPGA is microchip with user-configurable logic. It isn't a DAC, but with enough programming effort, it can be turned into one. While expensive, in the context of high-end audio the parts costs are manageable [The XC6SLX9 Chord uses in the 2Qute is currently less than $50 at digikey, but it might have been more in 2014 when the DAC was introduced.] I'm not sure what it is Chord needs this chip to do that can't be accomplished by a dedicated DAC chip - something about lots of filter taps - but I can't argue with the results.

 

[rjm]

To try and describe the sound of the 2Qute DAC in as few words as possible - and I spent a lot of time thinking this over - I can offer one single word "insistent".

If that sounds like a criticism, well: it is. It's the only signature of the DAC I can reliably track over different system configurations, and I would be dishonest if I pretended that there weren't times I wished I could dial things down just a notch. Yet it is clearly better than any other DAC I have heard. Whatever magic is being wrought by the 26,368 filter taps, the quantitative improvement to the sense of air and detail retrieval is palpable. Timing is outstanding, clarity and resolution are outstanding. This is especially apparent on complex, dynamic passages - the 2Qute never gets congested no matter what I throw at it.

For better and for worse there is a "master tape" vibe to the reproduction, in the sense of having all the information picked up off the recording and precisely reproduced for your inspection. I cannot fault the DAC for doing its job. It's just that sometimes I wish it would take the afternoon off and relax a little.

 

[rjm]

Now I have to make a big digression into sample rates, power supplies, and source data in order to put some big caveats on what I wrote above.

To be clear, I really, really like the 2Qute. It's on another level. But there are some things we need to talk about.

1. My (digital) music sucks. I stopped buying CDs around 1995-6. I ripped them to hardrive years ago and gave away the discs. Playing 90's era files back now really does highlight how bad the A/D and digital mastering technology was then, and the brutal limitations of 16 bit 44 kHz PCM. Upsampling to 24/384 and playing the files through a modern DAC cannot reconstruct what was lost in the studio. And I don't have any "high end", modern digital audio files to really do the 2Qute justice. I lack a reliable reference, in other words.

2. Youtube audio sounds crazy good. I single out Youtube both because of the wealth of listening material available and because it seems to sound better to my ears than audio streaming sites like Soundcloud (pretty good) or Spotify (not good). In what for me is the ultimate test: I can enjoy classical music on Youtube. I don't know what format they use, but things have come a long way from the days of 96 Kbps mp3s.

In addition to point 1,2 above, I need to also point out that the 2Qute nevertheless sounds best running from USB, with the highest sampling rate of 384 kHz. The optical digital signal from my Chromecast Audio automatically locks the DAC to 44 kHz, while the USB connection to ChromeOS and Android devices locks the DAC at 88 kHz. Both of those options sound considerably rougher than when I'm using my Windows 10/11 devices and the DAC is running at 384 kHz.

Finally I need to reiterate again that the sound is very sensitive to the power supply. However, as I don't have an earth ground in my house the susceptibility I note with the 2Qute may be more acute than it otherwise would be. Still though, not just the included switching power supply but even a similar supply plugged into the same power bar can cause a notable greyness to be introduced into the sound, sapping the dynamic life. That's definitely far from an ideal state of affairs.

 

[rjm]

An update: I have decided to sell the 2Qute to upgrade to the Ayre QB-9 Twenty.
I stand by everything I wrote above: the sound of this DAC is sharp and thin rather than round and full. It has excitement and intensity, brashness and sizzle. Natural timbres, however, are deeply recessed.

 

[rjm]

A side comment: c.f. the 2015 WhatHifi review of the 2Qute.

• an incredibly organised and detailed musical performance
• remarkable precision etching out every note with clarity and cohesion

The review is glowing, 5/5 stars, and it's interesting to me the way the language is tuned to put a positive spin on sonic characteristics I can agree are present, but I would not agree are desirable.

Case in point that "remarkable precision". When not listening to headphones, and with a slightly woolly sounding system overall, I could see how the jolt of extra resolution and energy could be perceived as a good thing. A fair, long-term evaluation would, however, discuss this "etching" in terms of advantages and disadvantages. On the other hand, I have to wonder if WhatHifi reviews are written in a kind of code, where if you read between the lines you can understand the issues embedded in the apparent praise. To say the specific phrase "etching out every note" strikes me as an odd choice if the writer wasn't intending it as an embedded warning.