Chord Qutest High Resolution DAC Review

If you want a genuinely great-sounding system but all you require to complete that system is a high quality standalone DAC, then the Qutest could be a very good choice. But the lack of a headphone output and other analogue circuitry does limit the versatility of the product.
Pros
  • Great Sound
  • Solid Build
  • Unique Design
  • Variable line-level voltage
Cons
  • Not Many Features
  • A Bit Costly
  • Requires external Amp
Final Rating
calcRating
Rating Details
Bottom Line
If you want a genuinely great-sounding system but all you require to complete that system is a high quality standalone DAC, then the Qutest could be a very good choice. But the lack of a headphone output and other analogue circuitry does limit the versatility of the product.
Table of Contents

Specs

  • Frequency Response : 20 Hz – 20 kHz (+/- 0.2dB)
  • THD : <0.0001%
  • Channel Separation : 138dB
  • Weight : 770g

What’s in the box

  • Chord Qutest
  • USB data cable
  • Power adapter
  • 4x regional plug adapters
  • Owner’s guide

Accessories

qutest-box-contents

As is usually the case with Chord’s products, there isn’t a whole lot that comes with the product. With the Qutest you really only get the bare essentials in the form of a USB data transfer cable and a wall wart with a few regional plug adaptors. It seems a little skimpy, as Chord surely could’ve thrown in perhaps a set of RCA cables, but we also can’t say that anything that is absolutely necessary has been left out.

Design

qutest-top
qutest-rear

When it comes to Chord Electronics, they make some of the most quirky-looking devices out there. I wouldn’t necessarily call them over-the-top designs, but they are quite unique. Some love the looks, whilst others don’t particularly care for it.
I’ve been able to review both the Mojo and the Hugo 2, and the Qutest has some definite design similarities to those 2 devices. Those glowing-orb buttons and the viewing port has become quite an iconic Chord design element.However, what I did notice about both the Mojo and the Hugo 2, especially the Hugo 2, is that they didn’t feel quite as solid as they looked. The Qutest, on the other-hand, I’m pretty certain could be classified as a certifiable weapon in some countries. It honestly feels physically solid, even though you can clearly see through the viewing port that the device is hollow. It really does have a deceptive amount of heft to it.
The overall layout is quite simple, as we only get 2 buttons and the viewing port on the top plate.Then on the rear is where we find the micro-USB power port, a USB-data port, a pair of coaxial BNC connectors, a full-sized optical port, and finally a set of stereo RCA outputs.
You may have noticed that I haven’t mentioned the headphone port. Well, that’s because there is none. The Qutest is purely a high-quality standalone DAC, which means that you’d have to send that line-level stereo signal to either a power or headphone amplifier, or set of powered speakers. However, if you don’t have a convenient method of controlling the volume on those powered-speakers, then you’d be better off placing a preamp in between the Qutest and the speakers as there is no analogue or digital volume control present on the Qutest. You can switch between a 1-volt, 2-volt, or 3-volt line-level signal, but there’s no actual volume control.

Functionality

Qutest-Manual-2

Like the Hugo 2 and the Mojo, the Qutest relies on a colour-LED system to convey certain information to the user. This of course can make for a very minimalist device in terms of being able to reduce the number of switches and what not, but it also isn’t a particularly intuitive way of doing things. By using a colour-coded system, what you’re requiring is for the user to then either memorise which colours mean what and for which function, or they have to keep the user-guide nearby as a reference. Now, the Qutest doesn’t have that many functions, so you kinda can get away with this type of user-interface.

Let’s start off with the user-selectable digital filters. The left-most button is used to select between the 4 different digital filters. A white colour is used to indicate that the “Incisive neutral” filter is selected, whereas green is for “Incisive neutral with high frequency roll-off”, orange is for the “Warm” filter, and red is reserved for the “Warm with high frequency roll-off”.

Then if we move over to the right switch, here we are again given 4 options as this switch is used to select between the 4 different inputs. If this switch is lit in a white colour, that means that the USB input has been selected, whereas yellow denotes COAX1, red is for COAX 2, and lastly a green LED colour is for the Optical input.

Then finally we also have the viewing port through which we can see another multi-colour LED which is used to indicate the sampling-rate of the digital signal that’s being fed to the Qutest. In total there are 11 colours which will show sampling-rates from 44.1kHz all the way up to DSD formats.

qutest-line-voltage

As briefly mentioned, there are 3 different voltage levels for the line-out signal, and this too is indicated by use of 3 different LED colours. When powering the Qutest on we have a 16-second window in which we can adjust this voltage level. To do this we simply need to press and hold both the “filter” and the “input” buttons simultaneously to make an adjustment. Here we have a red colour to show that the voltage level is at 1 volt, green is for 2-volts, and dark blue is for 3-volts.

Now, you might be wondering, what would be the need for a variable voltage line-level signal if there’s no volume control anyways? Well, I’d wager that, for most people, this is a function that they probably won’t be using. You can just go ahead and set it to 2-volts which is the most common line level voltage level.
However, there are 2 scenarios where I can see these different voltage-level choices being immensely helpful.
Let’s say that you’re a fan of both digital and vinyl audio and you happen to have a collection of both. Now, let’s say that you’ve got a single set of speakers and a single amplifier which can accept multiple source inputs. Now, unless this amplifier has a built-in phono preamp, there is a good chance that the voltage level from your external phono preamp could be lower than the level coming out of the Qutest. So, if you’ve just finished listening to some records and you then switch back to the Qutest before turning down the volume first, you might be in for quite a loud surprise. So, in that scenario, being able to drop the line-level voltage down to 1-volt would make things more convenient.

The other scenario that I can think of would be if you perhaps have an amplifier that is too powerful for your speakers or headphones. So for this you might have very little workable range on the volume pot. In that case you’d be able to drop the line-level coming out of the Qutest, and that would give you a more workable volume range.
Likewise if you have a set of headphones or speakers that require more volume than what your amp can give them, by being able to up the line-level from the Qutest to 3-volts the louder signal being sent to the amp will give you a more workable volume range.

Sound

chord-munich2018_1

There’s a reason why everyone in the audiophile world has heard of Chord Electronics. OK, yes, some of the groupie bus that follows these products can often exhibit somewhat of an off-putting “holier-than-thou” elitist attitude. But the fact remains that Rob Watts, the brainiac behind the magic, is damn good with what he does and there’s no denying that Chord does produce some truly excellent-sounding products.As the Qutest does have some selectable digital filters that do alter the sound character, let’s go over them briefly and how they sound. I’m not going to delve into the high frequency roll-off filters as those, well, exactly that, they soften the upper registers. Instead, let’s have a chat about the Neutral and Warm filters.
The Neutral is exactly what it says it is, it’s a flat-sounding signature which I’m guessing has the lowest amount of measurable distortion between all the given filters. As an overall signature I’d say that it’s enjoyable and offers, what seems to be, a very honest presentation of the sound that’s being fed to it.
But when I listen to the Warm filter, I must admit that I prefer this over the Neutral filter. Perhaps it’s because the Warm signature feels more akin to the sound that I’m getting out of my iTube2.
So, in essence, this filter does exactly what it says on the tin, it adds warmth to the sound without reducing the technical capability of the Qutest to retrieve details. The warmth that it’s able to add has much the same result as you’d get in a tube-based setup. To me it just adds a bit of thickness, some substance to the music. Things sound more organic, less forced in a way. I find this to be particularly true when I listen to music that has clear drum beats. Somehow the Neutral filter just has what I can only describe as a certain “snap” to the drum hit, whereas the Warm filter tends to have more of a fullness and punch. Acoustic guitars are another area where this difference in signature is more apparent to me. It’s almost as though the Neutral filter has more of an emphasis on the strings, whereas the Warm filter seems to bring out more of the resonance from the guitar. Overall I’d describe the Warm filter as providing the more realistic sound to me.
Again, this is very much in-line with the types of differences that I perceive between the sound coming from my iDSD Black Label versus how it sounds when going through the iTube2.

Comparisons

OK, so how about a comparison to see how the Qutest can flex its muscle.
Personally, wouldn’t call myself an iFi fanboy per se, but I do appreciate good value for money when I see it. I think iFi make some excellent performing and feature-rich products that are priced rather competitively. For me in terms of which products to compare to Chord’s products, iFi is always the one that jumps at me.
Yes, Chord’s products often cost quite a bit more, but one thing we need to keep in mind, and this applies to so many industries, regardless if we are talking about mechanical or electrical designs, from headphones to DACs and AMPs, or, for the sake of the argument, even mechanical watches; the thing we always need to bear in the back of our minds is that a more expensive, or otherwise more complex or elaborate design does not mean that it would necessarily be a better performing product.
Now when we consider iFi’s line-up, their best performing DAC solution would be the Pro iDSD, but that is also a considerably larger, more versatile and indeed more expensive product than the Qutest. Instead, iFi states that, after the Pro iDSD, the Micro iDAC2 is their best performing desktop DAC solution. They even put it slightly ahead of the Micro iDSD Black Label.
But could it be? Could a sub-$400 DAC competently compete with the $1000 Qutest? Well, there was only one way to find out.

Qutest vs. iDAC 2

Listening to these 2 products back to back once again showed me just how much value iFi packs into their products. But, that being said, I can’t deny the technical prowess of the Qutest. I don’t know if it’s because of the type of processor used to handle the audio or it’s mainly the wizardry on the part of Rob Watts, but the Qutest is a very good performing product. The odd thing is that Chord states that the Qutest is based on the Hugo 2. OK, so how much exactly does it have in common? Does it have the same digital-to-analogue conversion stage and the difference mainly comes down to the fact that the Hugo 2 has a built-in amplification stage? I don’t know to be honest, but what I can tell you that, when I reviewed the Hugo 2 a couple of months ago, I really couldn’t tell you that I found its technical capability quite as good as that of the Qutest. Well, whatever it is that’s going on here, the fact remains that the Qutest truly is a great sounding product.
Comparing the sound signature of the Neutral filter to the minimum phase filter on the iDAC2, I must admit that I preferred the slightly warmer character of the iDAC2. But then when I listen more closely and consider the detail retrieval on the Qutest the iDAC easily takes 2nd place in that department.
But, it’s when we switch over into the Warm filter that the Chord pulls ahead of the iFi. That warmth that I enjoy from the iFi is there, but without sacrificing the technicality that I hear in the Neutral signature. It really does come down to being a ‘best of both worlds’ kinda situation.

But, then there’s this total ass-hat of a curve ball to throw into the mix. And when I say it’s a curve ball, I really mean it’s a curve-ball. Hooking the iDAC2 up to the iTube2 and then listening to and comparing that combo to the Qutest completely left me in a place, a mindset that I absolutely hate being in. I really cannot make up my mind which sound character I prefer more here. The differences are there, but each one has something distinct and special about it. The Chord has that technical capability of pulling out details, but then there’s the iFi combo that brings to the table this fantastically organic sound. I often hear this especially in the bass region where the Qutest sometimes seems just a little muddy in comparison. In contrast the iFi combo brings a specific presence and control to the bass, but without bleeding into the mids.
At the end of the day it’s going to come down to your own personal preference…well, that and perhaps your budget. If you like a slightly brighter-sounding signature (and I say that entirely with reference to the tube-sound of that iFi combo), then the Chord might be your pick. But both really do have their own qualities, and it honestly is impossible for me to outright call one or the other a definite winner.

Value

Now, taking all of that into account, how would we place the total value of the Qutest? Essentially, we are talking about total bang-for buck value here.
What we get is a very nicely designed and solidly built device. It sounds great and it does give you quite a couple of features in terms of input options, digital filters, and that user-selectable voltage level for the line-outputs. But it does cost $1000. In contrast, if we look at that iFi combo, the iDAC2 will set you back somewhere in the region of $380, and the iTube2 is around $400. For the sake of the argument, let’s just call it $800.
So, $1000 vs $800. That’s an appreciable difference, but not exactly a huge difference.
The thing is, with the iFi combo you simply get more features, more functionality, more versatility thrown into the deal. The Chord might have those BNC connections and an optical input, but the iDAC2 on its own does also have a headphone output and it’s also able to take the USB-input signal and output it via a COAX connection to an external device.
Then there’s the iTube2 which, because it can either act as only a buffer or a preamp, can give you both full analogue volume control and a boosted line-level much like the 3-volt option on the Qutest. In addition to that, iFi also threw in the various tube signatures, as well as the 3D+ and XBass+ effects.
When we consider all of that we can start to see just how much is packed into iFi’s products.
So, when picking between either the Qutest or the iFi combo, it’s really going to come down to whether or not the iFi products have any additional features that you might either want or need.
Another iFi combo option to consider would be the Micro Black Label and iTube2. Together they’ll cost you roughly $1000, so, in terms of price, that would be a more direct comparison to the Qutest. In this scenario, the extra features of the Black Label along with the fact that it can be used as a perfectly competent portable device, that would perhaps surge well ahead of the Chord in terms of overall bang-for-buck.
But, absolutely none of that matters if those extras features and versatility doesn’t appeal to you. If you perhaps prefer the look of the Chord, then really the Qutest doesn’t seem like bad buy at all.