or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Chord Hugo - Page 202

post #3016 of 14275

I sort of hear distinctively different sound through HD USB input, one using windows wasabi Hugo driver, the other being Asio Hugo driver . Are both outputing DoP? or is the wasabi Hugo driver converting to PCM before feeding Hugo? In both modes foolbar shows DSD/176,400khz?

 

Asio driver tend to be more lively, finer , shows clearer nuances  and conveys more emotions, but will be subject to interference when , say, loading web pages . The  wasapi mode is not affected . 

post #3017 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by audionewbi View Post

When you say redbook how do you play it back? Optical or coaxial?

Optical from Tempotec digital only sound card. I found this sound card extremely jitter free. 

post #3018 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by pigfatcat View Post
 

What puzzles me is that , for me, redbook recording sounds better, more lively and natural  on Hugo c.f. the same recording in DSD ( ripped from SACD ) on Hugo. This brings back my earlier post: is it related to less than perfect rendering of the HD USB input? I do not have any player which can transmit DoP in coaxial. So I cannot  compare . I can easily have access to more than 10T of ripped SACD here in China. The fact that the SACDs sound not as well as expected ( may be very good by  itself, but the Red Book rendering on Hugo is so excellent when compared with)  in Hugo really puts me off 

I realized that earlier on when I made the comparisons , I was using wasapi Hugo driver instead of asio Hugo driver . Now using asio Hugo driver , the musicality rivals or exceeds that of Red Book recordings using optical input . In fact resolution of course surpass Red Book with either driver . Red Book presentation through optical in still have some edge in the weight of the bass . I guess this may be due to the stock USB cable used, or is a coloration of my optical ouptut from the PC. There is a significant difference between the two drivers , especially in so far as musicality , liveliness and naturalness is concerned .

post #3019 of 14275

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa92058 View Post
 


16 44 sounds as good or most of the time better than my high res. material.My hugo is going to save me a lot of money going forward.:)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamato8 View Post
 

What impresses so much is the way the Hugo handles regular resolution files. I don't know how it pulls out the sound it does. The echo, slap from the walls of the environment, if they are there, the openness, details I had not heard before and could not imagine where there. This impresses me more than the hi res/dsd because it makes so much of my well recorded red book, so much more than what it was. I would buy it just for that. 

I agree very much with these two quotes, and it is simply down to the very big WTA tap length that Hugo enjoys - 26,368 taps, way way bigger than any other DAC I have seen.

 

Having all those taps means the interpolation filter does a more accurate job of reconstructing the original timing of the recording. Timing is an incredibly important cue for the brain, and we know that the ear/brain can resolve down to 4 micro seconds - so the brain via the inter-aural network is sampling at 250 kHz! Now I have been rattling on about the importance of timing for a very long time, but a recent paper in Physics Review Letters proves how important timing is:

 

http://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html

 

Don't read the paper unless you want your head to hurt.

 

Anyhow, if the interpolation filter has an infinite no of taps, then it will reconstruct the timing and amplitude of the original bandwidth limited signal perfectly. That is a mathematical certainty. So increasing tap length will give better sound, because you are reconstructing the timing more accurately. Is 26,368 the last word? No its not, there is a huge difference going from 18,432 to Hugo's 26,368, I can't imagine that increasing it further won't make a big difference. When would increasing tap length stop improving the sound - 100k? 1M? 10M? Nobody knows, but I will have a better idea soon.

 

Since Hugo has more taps than any other DAC, then the timing problems of red-book CD will be better handled by Hugo than any other DAC, and so the timing benefits of higher sample rates will get much smaller.

 

But why the suggestion that red-book has maybe better than higher sample rate recordings? I am starting to see this too, and I think the problem maybe down to the problems that high sample rate has - they have better timing resolution than red-book, but they let in a lot of HF rubbish from the ADC noise shapers. Now I know out of band noise creates big SQ problems, as it inter modulates in the analogue sections, it increases the DAC's sensitivity to jitter, with the result of more noise floor modulation, giving a harder more aggressive SQ. I hear this with DXD recordings, a brightness that sounds just like noise floor modulation. I am experimenting on filtering out this noise, to see if there is some benefit in doing this. Now red-book has timing problems, but it has no noise above 22.05 kHz (if you do the interpolation filter correctly!). So Hugo goes a very long way to fix the timing problems, so high rez recordings no longer enjoys better timing than red-book, but high rez has the downside of HF noise problems.

 

Oh and before anybody asks, will these high sample rate filters be on Hugo? Absolutely not, I have no space left on Hugo's FPGA!

post #3020 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLS1 View Post
 

I think the Chord Hugo is really a game changer. I read from folks on this forum and elsewhere that it's the best dac for money or as good as the ones double priced.

 

 I'd like to ask anyone who read this if they have heard any other dac at any price that can beat the Hugo in sound quality. If you did, please tell what it is and what aspect of SQ you like better ?

 

I have to interject here, simply because these are the kind of posts that may see the Hugo in the crosshairs of a certain section of this hobby who cant get over the form factor - or the aesthetics - and accept that the technology may well be a 'game changer', You've basically left us with some very loaded questions and I've never been a fan of the 'competes with products at twice the price' line - logically, how many DACs can hope to do that, year in and year out ? Let's leave the cliches to TAS and Stereophile - they get paid to trot those out  ;)

 

My Oppo BDP-105D has - to my 55-year old ears - sharper transients than the Hugo, but that's just one part of the palette. Where I fear Hugo may struggle is in 'Can-Jam' style auditions - its simply too mature and effortless for some of us to appreciate at first listen. While the Oppo wants to impress me with it's detail retrieval, the Hugo doesnt want to tear any of my music apart - even the lossy iTunes tracks and youtube vids. When was the last time you ate something which had no particular flavor of its own but made everything else taste great ? 

 

I'm a believer, but I'm not going to judge Hugo on the basis of whether it ticks a specific box - for the money I paid, this is the Special Sauce we spend years and thousands of dollars looking for on HF - I tip my hat to Rob and everyone at Chord. 

post #3021 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by OK-Guy View Post
 

 

I only promote shows & events... you buy from Phil. :normal_smile :

 

btw I heard Rob likes a pint of Guinness... so I guess he's pure genius. 


 :-) Cheers OK-Guy

post #3022 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post
 

 

I have to interject here, simply because these are the kind of posts that may see the Hugo in the crosshairs of a certain section of this hobby who cant get over the form factor - or the aesthetics - and accept that the technology may well be a 'game changer', You've basically left us with some very loaded questions and I've never been a fan of the 'competes with products at twice the price' line - logically, how many DACs can hope to do that, year in and year out ? Let's leave the cliches to TAS and Stereophile - they get paid to trot those out  ;)

 

My Oppo BDP-105D has - to my 55-year old ears - sharper transients than the Hugo, but that's just one part of the palette. Where I fear Hugo may struggle is in 'Can-Jam' style auditions - its simply too mature and effortless for some of us to appreciate at first listen. While the Oppo wants to impress me with it's detail retrieval, the Hugo doesnt want to tear any of my music apart - even the lossy iTunes tracks and youtube vids. When was the last time you ate something which had no particular flavor of its own but made everything else taste great ? 

 

I'm a believer, but I'm not going to judge Hugo on the basis of whether it ticks a specific box - for the money I paid, this is the Special Sauce we spend years and thousands of dollars looking for on HF - I tip my hat to Rob and everyone at Chord. 

 

It took me many hours of listening to Hugo before I realized it was the best digital music reproducer I have heard. It certainly rivals and in some cases outmatch some of my vinyl library. Listening to old recordings I have heard many times before is revealing. Thanks mr. Watts!

post #3023 of 14275
Just wanted to say big thanks to Phil at Custom Cables. Very patient and helpful as I demoed the full Audeze range and HD800. Feel very happy with my purchase...
Very quick summary of session:
HD800 - Bit too bright for me.
LCD-2 - very nice great bass and body, until you hear the others....
LCD-X - amazing speed, punch and resolution very exciting.
LCD-3 - lush and balanced with amazing mids
So for me the X won the day and ordered a pair, just suited my taste of faster paced music, metal, rap, dance. It was close though the 3 is an amazing headphone...oh to BA able to have both!!
All this was paired with my amazing Hugo.
Might just be end game system...for now!
post #3024 of 14275

 

things are a'rocking at the Munich High-End Show... we should have some photo's soon

 

best to go see for yourself, fire-up the Merc AMG V8 & zoom down the Autobahn...

 

 

post #3025 of 14275
Received my Hugo today, the new version, serial number starts with 2. The box is black with an USB cable, many optical cables and USB drive (insted of CD). Still waiting for RCA cables from Custom Cables.
Thanks Custom-Cable Team!
post #3026 of 14275
Off topis (sorry): I Could't find any Munich 's High-End Audio show REPORT thread here on Head-Fi ( or on the internet ) ?!
post #3027 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLS1 View Post
 

 

It took me many hours of listening to Hugo before I realized it was the best digital music reproducer I have heard.

 

Took me about 5 minutes.  Did I win the race?

post #3028 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeoKane View Post

Just wanted to say big thanks to Phil at Custom Cables. Very patient and helpful as I demoed the full Audeze range and HD800. Feel very happy with my purchase...
Very quick summary of session:
HD800 - Bit too bright for me.
LCD-2 - very nice great bass and body, until you hear the others....
LCD-X - amazing speed, punch and resolution very exciting.
LCD-3 - lush and balanced with amazing mids
So for me the X won the day and ordered a pair, just suited my taste of faster paced music, metal, rap, dance. It was close though the 3 is an amazing headphone...oh to BA able to have both!!
All this was paired with my amazing Hugo.
Might just be end game system...for now!

 

To each their own - I use almost all of those headphones (just cant pony up for the LCD-3) with my Hugo and its the HD800 I keep coming back to, even if my own LCD-X audition would seem to be a mirror of your own. Absolutely stunned by how much more of the good stuff the X had over the HiFiMan HE500 from a Taurus, but I could still understand why many view them as one of the great bargains in the head-fi universe and they were much more comfortable than either of the Audeze head crushers.  


Edited by estreeter - 5/16/14 at 7:48am
post #3029 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post
 

 

To each their own - I use almost all of those headphones (just cant pony up for the LCD-3) with my Hugo and its the HD800 I keep coming back to, even if my own LCD-X audition would seem to be a mirror of your own. Absolutely stunned by how much more of the good stuff the X had over the HiFiMan HE500 from a Taurus, but I could still understand why many view them as one of the great bargains in the head-fi universe and they were much more comfortable than either of the Audeze head crushers.  

HD800 was truly an emotional experience for me. I gave myself a full three months since I last audition it and I had been using the TH900 which is my own for a while. Still HD800 is stuck in my head. I am going back there again and I might make the first payment for the H800. Just the endless upgrade potential of HD800 scares me but I think it is worth it.

 

I know the pairing with HUGO will be equally great but I cannot see myself going back there tomorrow just so I can audition it with HUGO, feel bad.

 

Preference plays a major role, my house sound is ER4S and this is perhaps why I had such "love at first sight" with HD800. By all means TH900 is in no way that lacking but this ears does not get why people go back to other gear after having a HD800. 

post #3030 of 14275
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post

To each their own - I use almost all of those headphones (just cant pony up for the LCD-3) with my Hugo and its the HD800 I keep coming back to, even if my own LCD-X audition would seem to be a mirror of your own. Absolutely stunned by how much more of the good stuff the X had over the HiFiMan HE500 from a Taurus, but I could still understand why many view them as one of the great bargains in the head-fi universe and they were much more comfortable than either of the Audeze head crushers.  
I have a small head so found the Audeze comfortable, not as comfortable as the HD-800 mind. They are beautifully made, very light and easy to wear. I listen to music very loud and the HD-800 became to harsh on my ears at high volume. The detail they produce and the air between the instruments is fantastic though. Like you said each to their own and for all the reviews in the world you need to listen and make your own mind up. I went into the demo pretty much expecting to like the LCD-3 best, but the X won it by a hairs breath.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum