New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Chord Hugo - Page 399

post #5971 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by elviscaprice View Post
 


I have both the 650's and Audeze LCD X's.  No comparison, the X's blow away the 650's in my opinion.  Of course at 5 times the cost I paid for the 650's, the X's are in my opinion the go to headphones paired with the Hugo.  The detail and stage presentation are like being there, Live.

 

What I love about the Hugo is that in combination with quality cans such as the X's, you probably equal some of the best sound systems in any combination on the market today and all you need is two pieces along with your PC/existing play back device.

So for roughly 4K you've got reference sound second to none?  Simplicity and quality, two of my favorite objectives.

I see. I've heard they're good but they're not sold in my country. Besides, people say they are big and heavy, might be big for my head.

post #5972 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by obsidyen View Post
 

I see. I've heard they're good but they're not sold in my country. Besides, people say they are big and heavy, might be big for my head.

Yeah, they we're a little heavy at first, had a sore neck from first use, but after that I never notice them and wear them several hours at a time. Have good clamping balance all around.

post #5973 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post
 

 

 I'm not prepared to dismiss the more expensive gear simply because I havent heard it. 

 

plenty of people dismissing (off loading) their expensive hi-end gear to get a Hugo... a few well known branded forums are in disarray but I won't naim them.

post #5974 of 9117

I'm definitely going to buy a Hugo,no question.I've pretty much made up my mind on the 846s,the Noble K10 is an option,but just too

difficult to get hold of.With the 846s,I will get ACS custom tips made,as well as an aftermarket cable,for comfort as much as anything.

With IEMs,an efficient seal is everything,especially,if like me,you like a decent bass.I'm doing my online research now because I live

in the mountains of southern Spain,no audio shops here.I'll be travelling to the UK at Xmas,can't wait!

post #5975 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenacheros View Post
 

I'm definitely going to buy a Hugo,no question.I've pretty much made up my mind on the 846s,the Noble K10 is an option,but just too

difficult to get hold of.With the 846s,I will get ACS custom tips made,as well as an aftermarket cable,for comfort as much as anything.

With IEMs,an efficient seal is everything,especially,if like me,you like a decent bass.I'm doing my online research now because I live

in the mountains of southern Spain,no audio shops here.I'll be travelling to the UK at Xmas,can't wait!

 

How do the ACS custom tips work?  Don't you have to send them a mold of your ears?  If that is the case, why would Nobles or any of the CIEMs be more hassle than ACS custom tips?

post #5976 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashem View Post
 

 

How do the ACS custom tips work?  Don't you have to send them a mold of your ears?  If that is the case, why would Nobles or any of the CIEMs be more hassle than ACS custom tips?

 

ACS have long made custom-tips for Shure IEM's and yes you have to get ear-impressions done... ACS are pretty popular with musicians, they make some well regarded silicon CIEM's but I've never heard them.

post #5977 of 9117

Try the TH900 with the Hugo. It's really nice. Great tonality.

post #5978 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenacheros View Post
 

I'm definitely going to buy a Hugo,no question.I've pretty much made up my mind on the 846s,the Noble K10 is an option,but just too

difficult to get hold of.With the 846s,I will get ACS custom tips made,as well as an aftermarket cable,for comfort as much as anything.

With IEMs,an efficient seal is everything,especially,if like me,you like a decent bass.I'm doing my online research now because I live

in the mountains of southern Spain,no audio shops here.I'll be travelling to the UK at Xmas,can't wait!

I had a girl from Granada a few years ago.. Good times. :) She got married to a Welsh guy now though, lol.

 

I think IE800s sound great with Hugo. I prefer their sound signature more to 846s. 

post #5979 of 9117

As I mentioned, I live in a very rural, hidden away part of southern Spain, great for many things, but not decent audio.  A couple of times a year I return to the UK. I'll be there at Xmas, that'll be Hugo time, and back during the summer for a couple of months, that'll be, almost certainly, 846 time. I really like the idea of the K10, and wouldn't hesitate to buy them, but, the turnaround time on them is 30/40 days.  That's in addition to postal/courier services and customs both ends. Ear impressions of course will need to be taken, almost certainly involving a day trip to London. An approval 'photo needs to be taken and sent to China, then the moulds will need to be dispatched, that will involve a couple of hours waiting in line in Oxford St. Aldates post office. 

 

If this years Dr. Moulton (The Wizard) birthday 20% discount is repeated, I could spend the saving on a priority manufacture order, $300, 6/7 days turn around, giving me a $20 saving on full price, and IEMs in my grubby hands reasonably quickly. That would be OK. The alternative is to order the 846s from a German Shure dealer for £800ish, depending on an increasingly strong Pound, they offer a three year warranty. Cables I'll get from Forza Audioworks, by all accounts decent quality, great people to deal with, as well as a rapid turn around. ACS custom tips are based in Banbury, about 15 miles north of Oxford. I can buy an ACS voucher for between £90 and £120, with a choice of many perfectly capable audiologists throughout the south of England who act as agents for ACS, they'll take the impressions. Turnaround on those should be 4/6 weeks, at the outside. 

 

I know from my Senn.  IE80s a proper seal is key to decent bass, as well as mids and treble. All in all, just so much easier than dealing with CIEMS, even though I am convinced by the "silver bullet" quality of the K10s. I had found myself thinking about booking next summers flights around Noble's manufacturing schedule, audio madness beckons!! I'm quite sure the Hugo will be a revelation for me and my CD collection, the 846s will be more than "good enough". I've looked at all of the grown up headphones, but as well as the weight and clamping that comes with those, the heat here in Spain is a real issue, as well as the sweatiness of leather pads.  IEMS are far more comfortable for me, plus I like the sense and immediacy of sound.

 

If anyone has experience of the Hugo/846s, or knows of any negative aspects of that combo, I'd be very interested to hear them. Thanks. 

 
PS.  Apologies if my posts appear in a fragmented form. Neither my son, who is much brighter and computer savvy than me, nor I, can
      workout why this happens. 

 

[Mod Edit: Fixed the formatting and added paragraphs for you.]

post #5980 of 9117

I can see where universals might work better.  Might want to check out the universals coming from the CIEM companies, like Roxanne and Noble has some as well.  I just bought the Tralucent Ref1 as I am curious about balanced armiture and dynamic drivers mix together.  In any case, Tralucent IEMs are universal as well.  Finally, Fitear makes some great stuff as well in the universal variety.

post #5981 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Watts View Post
 

Good question. Every time I talk about sampling, I specifically say that the interpolation filter, with an infinite number of taps, will perfectly (that is, completely perfectly, it will be the same signal just time shifted) reconstruct the original bandwidth limited input signal. Now this bandwidth limited signal must have no output at all above the Nyquist frequency. So the interpolation is not trying to re-create information that is not already present at the point of sampling - but if you use an infinite tap length interpolation filter you will reconstruct the original bandwidth limited signal perfectly - so this means you have effectively not sampled the signal, and filled out the in-between data perfectly.

 

So in your case, you put a signal that has information only above the Nyquist frequency (say a 30 kHz tone) and you are sampling at 44.1k. Now you put this signal through a brick wall filter set to infinite attenuation above 22.05k, that will mean the output of the filter is zero. You then sample zero, the perfect interpolation then re-creates - zero, exactly as it should do. Now the point I am trying to make is if you have a finite tap length filter, then when it re-constructs the bandwidth limited signal, there will be timing errors in the reconstruction process, and these timing errors are significant. To illustrate this, imagine a 20 kHz tone burst. So the signal is zero, then it is full output (and yes in reality it would not be this way as it would have pre-ringing due to the brick wall filter but ignore this as I am trying to illustrate a point). Now if we happen to sample at the peaks, then we will get a full output, followed by a declining output. If we sample at the point it is zero, then we lose the missing transient, and the signal then builds up so that at a few hundred uS later we get peak output. Now lets take the worst case, a FIR filter with a tap length of 1, (it returns the data unchanged so no filtering) then we can see that the transient timing error is hundreds of uS. Now if we use an infinite tap length filter, then it will reconstruct the output of the brick wall filter perfectly, zero timing errors, it would be as if we had not sampled the data at all. My point of view was that conventional filters, with limited taps of a hundred or so, would create time domain errors that would be audible.

 

Now I use the 4uS inter-aural delay as an illustration of the importance of timing to the ear/brain. I have no idea what levels of timing errors are significant - that is a 4uS error of -60 dB, or is it -80dB - or indeed whether its 4uS or 4nS - after all, if I gave you a DAC that had 4uS of timing error you would say that may be a problem - but if I then said 4uS of jitter (timing error is the same as jitter), then you would be horrified, that must be audible as people keep going on about femto clocks within DAC's...

 

So my approach has been very simple - to recognise that the FIR filter tap length is important for reconstructing the timing of transients, and to keep increasing the tap length until I can no longer hear any improvement, and secondly that the FIR interpolation algorithm itself has to be optimized to improve timing and maximize sound quality with a finite number of taps.

 

So in short, an infinite tap length filter will perfectly re-create the bandwidth limited signal, as if no sampling had taken place. It absolutely will not recreate the signal before the brick wall input filter - but my listening tests has shown that linear phase brick-wall filters are completely transparent anyway, if you do them correctly. The sound quality problem is not the initial brick wall filter, but the interpolation reconstruction filter. That's why red-book sounds so good with Hugo...    

 

Hope this explains,

 

Rob   


Thanks Rob,

Maybe I'm not fully awake but I think you've answered my question...

 

I understand timing is important, I understand the Hugo somehow take those 22u samples and makes them into 4u (by adding an extra 5 'new samples' between the 'old ones?) - what I don't get logically is how can you reconstruct a sound or transient that lasted less than 22u (maybe it's too short for us to even hear?) if it started and ended between two 22u samples?

 

I love the Hugo and am simply curios, as you can see I have no DSP background and my math is very rusty... ;)

 

PS
I think it's incredibly cool you take the time to answer us plebs here - you are a real Mensch!

post #5982 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundRound View Post
 


Thanks Rob,

Maybe I'm not fully awake but I think you've answered my question...

 

I understand timing is important, I understand the Hugo somehow take those 22u samples and makes them into 4u (by adding an extra 5 'new samples' between the 'old ones?) - what I don't get logically is how can you reconstruct a sound or transient that lasted less than 22u (maybe it's too short for us to even hear?) if it started and ended between two 22u samples?

 

I love the Hugo and am simply curios, as you can see I have no DSP background and my math is very rusty... ;)

 

PS
I think it's incredibly cool you take the time to answer us plebs here - you are a real Mensch!

It actually digitally filters up to 9.6nS, not 4uS! The 4uS is just the inter-aural delay resolution of the ear/brain. So Hugo adds 2048 new samples....

post #5983 of 9117

Still, 

How does it know what to add if there original (22u) data isn't there? ;-)

post #5984 of 9117

I have a limited understanding of all the technical discussion re engineering audio specs and other connector issues that has been going on for aeons in this forum. I would like to share three references below about human brain and sound/music which may be of interest to those taking part in these discussions and audio engineers/ DAC developers  alike:

 

1)      Superior time perception for lower musical pitch explains why bass-ranged instruments lay down musical rhythms by  Michael J. Hovea, Céline Mariea, Ian C. Brucec, and

Laurel J. Trainora.  Edited by Dale Purves, Duke University, Durham, NC, and approved June 4, 2014 (received for review February 1, 2014).

In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Early Edition articles for 2 July 2014

 

2)       Levitin, Daniel J. (2006). This is your brain on Music. The Science of a Human Obessession. Dutton Penguin Group. 

 

3)      Williamson, Victoria. (2014). You Are the Music. How Music Reveals What It means To be Human. Icon books.

 

I am one of those who listen to the music (classical in my case) and not the equipment and have actually found much of the discussion dissuades me from venturing into acquiring some of these items as no doubt I will connect the wrong thing with the wrong thing and receive no auditory benefit. I don’t have a friendly corner audiophile shop who can explain all the ins and outs to me and make suggestions which is one reason why I joined these forums in the first place to get “overheard” advice. To be honest I have found the musical performance, instrument, and recording venue, then recording equipment etc, makes the most difference, earphones next, cables next and DAP/DAC last, Amps not even considered. The less coloured lights flashing  like a merry-go round and the less gizmos with so many holes to choose for insertion it begins to sound like an alphabet soup of modern sexuality,  probably the better as far as I am concerned. Much of it sounds like friends cobbling together some jerry rigged effort that may topple over at any moment. An explanatory diagram of what kind of plug from what GOODY can possibly be connected to what hole IN and likewise for OUT to what GOODY may explain the choices one has and what differences they make.  Any brave illustrator engineers as takers?

 

post #5985 of 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundRound View Post
 

Still, 

How does it know what to add if there original (22u) data isn't there? ;-)

The maths gives us an answer - so long as the impulse response of the FIR filter is a sin(x)/x response at FS/2 it will perfectly reconstruct the missing points. But the problem is, that to get a 8 times oversampling filter to have this response to better than 16 bit accuracy, you need getting on for a million taps...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum