[Duncan]

I have that album from the head-fi Christmas promotion, must load it up and take a listen.

Thanks for the reminder SilverEars

 

[jamato8]

Yep, to go for a walk and have some of the best home audio with you is crazy. I use the DX90 or 50 as a source and have a great variety of music to listen to. The Koss Porta Pros sound very fine out of the Hugo. 
 

  Since you mentioned binaural, try this.  It wowed me with Hugo.
 

I will also look for this. Great! 

 

[Rob Watts]

I'm now starting to realise (after going for a 30 minute stroll last night that ended up as a 3.5hr marathon thanks to Hugo) that there really is life in the old redbook dog yet, the detail pulled out of files is incredible

One very minor annoyance though, I wish it could remember the last input you was using when power cycling, especially as coax is at the furthest point of button presses...

Yes it annoys me too. The intention was to store the configuration to the FLASH, but I ran out of space on the FPGA. Adding one more flip-flop meant the design became un-routable, and since I had struggled a lot on maintaining the sound quality with all of Hugo's functionality - basically getting everything to fit - it meant that I would have to lose an interpolation filter to add the memory. This would have made Hugo sound less smooth and refined. So I stuck with better sound , and poorer usability. If I can figure a way of slimming down the design, but with maintaining SQ to add the memory, I will.
 
Rob 

 

[Currawong]

That explains much! I got around that by memorising how many presses I needed for each input, because I was A/Bing between inputs using two computers or DAPs.
 
I did this at a cafe too. Not being a city cafe, but out in the sticks, I had to consciously avoid people's stares, in this case not just because I was an obvious foreigner, but because of the electronics sitting on the table.

 

[TokenGesture]

Good to be home
The musicality of Hugo is a topic definitely worth discussing. I have no analogue experience, I'm a child of CD. Hugo seems to share a smoothness with analogue but not at the expense of almost hyper detail. Was that your intention Rob?

 

[uelover]

I have no analogue experience, I'm a child of CD. Hugo seems to share a smoothness with analogue but not at the expense of almost hyper detail. 

 
Contradictory? 

 

[TokenGesture]

   
Contradictory? 

Probably ( I was woken up at 4.30 am by my 2 yo) 

 
True though?

 

[kkcc]

Thanks Duncan for the portable thread. While I didn't get my Hugo mainly for portable use, I've been rotating between AK240, HM901 (various amp board), DX90, and the Hugo these days. I received a number of PMs asking for various comparisons and thought I might just collected my thoughts and share. I'm by no means a technical person nor too interested to understand why things sound certain way. Below are just my very subjective impressions. Unless otherwise stated, the impressions were done with 1plus2/jh13fp/tg334 primarily across many genres of 16/44 to 24/192 FLAC.

Chord Hugo vs DAPs mini review:

1. DX90 (2.0 firmware) vs DX90 -> Hugo via stock DX90 coaxial:
Similarities:
- very clean/black background
- good treble extension and neutral-ish signature
- nice instrument separation

Differences:
- Hugo is more resolving and present more nuisances of every note that it delivers
- Hugo has more sub-bass impact without warming up the signature too much
- Hugo has a signature that is less sterile/more musical (but only a touch warmer)
- Hugo has wider soundstage with better depth and a slightly more forward vocal presentation


Bottomline:
- The improvement from DX90 to DX90->Hugo is substantial. I think of it as W4->TG334 type difference. Everything I like about DX90 is still there, but almost everything is much improved. My non-audiophile friends unanimously prefer the Hugo sound.


2. AK240 (1.1.5 firmware) balanced out vs AK240 -> Hugo via sysconcept optical:
Similarities:
- superb resolution
- nice staging and instrument separation
- neutral signature that is engaging and musical

Differences:
- Hugo has more sub-bass impact
- AK240 is slightly more flat in FR
- Hugo has a smoother vocal presentation that sounded more refined when AK240 at times might sound more coarse
- AK240 has wider soundstage in balanced mode
- Hugo gives more perceivable spatial cues of the relative positioning of sounds in the recording making it more real and more life-like
- Hugo is slightly more resolving/transparent


Bottomline:
- The improvement from AK240 balanced to AK240->Hugo is less substantial then but still material. I'm surprised I had been willing to carry a AK240+Hugo stack as it IS a big hassle for me to carrying stacks. The sound does improve enough for me to overlook the inconveniences.


3. HM901+balanced amp card vs HM901 -> Hugo vs stock HM901 LOD coaxial:
Similarities:
- powerful amp section that drives full-size cans well
- extremely resolving and present superb micro-details
- covey very perceivable spatial cues and a "right" size of imaging

Differences:
- HM901 has a slightly fuller bodied sound and a warmer signature that is great for vocal tracks, Hugo sound thinner in comparison
- Hugo has a darker background with sensitive IEMs and drive LCD3/HD800/HE6 better than the HM901
- Hugo feels very transparent and deliver excellent instrument timbres and all the subtleties of singers' voice


Bottomline:
- Compared to the DX90/AK240, HM901 is the closest in overall SQ compared to when they are paired with Hugo. I still prefer the Hugo stacks due to it's transparency. However, SQ advantages alone may not be enough to justify adding on the cost/bulk of the Hugo.

[Edit: clean up some typos and formatting issue. Typing long post on my phone is really not ideal.]

 

[Duncan]

kkcc I hope that this thread stays on track, now that the Summit-Fi thread is closed, I can see that this one will become quite popular, so - will have to keep tight reigns on it!

That aside, you could either save me, or cost me a lot of money!

...If we extend your thoughts one stage further, is there a substantial in your opinion between DAC out's of the DX90, and the other players?

...Am happy (make that VERY happy) with the FiiO X5 digital out to Hugo, however - if you tell me there is a marked difference between your players, and how they interact with Hugo, then - that'll be more money spent ;o)

Thanks in advance!

Duncan.

 

[kkcc]

Duncan, there were many discussion over the various digital outs (and extending into interconnect) preferences.

Personally for me, I don't feel much if any difference to Hugo's SQ when paired with the dx90/ak240/hm901. I tried comparing these for half a day with my various iems and headphones and I don't find any material differences that made me prefer one DAP over another as transport.

For reference, using Note3 via AptX IS materially worse than using any of these daps digital out.

Guess I'm saving you some $$$? On the other hand you might be costing me some as I do think the thinner/flatter profile of the x5 may actually stacks better than any of my current DAP...

Btw I'm really looking forward to Chord releasing the leather case. I went as far as providing detailed measurement of my Hugo to custom leather case makers but so far no one is willing to make one....

 

[CosmicHolyGhost]

Kkcc, u just saved me money as I was planning to buy the sysconcept toslink cable before. Thanks

 

[Duncan]

Thanks kkcc... Exactly what I wanted to hear - muchos gracias!

 

[isquirrel]

Glad the Hugo thread is back! (with Rob as bonus) hopefully it won't get highjacked this time...

 

[Mimouille]

I have the 901, RWAK240 and Hugo as well, and would say that 240 and Hugo have quite close sound signatures, Hugo being to my ears significantly better. Compared to 901, the sound sigs are too different for clear technical comparison but Hugo still has the edge. I have not noticed significant changes in SQ when changing the transport used with Hugo...whether it be computer via USB, 901 via coax or 240 via optical.

However, I am not sure how I could use Hugo in a portable stack. Transportable for sure, but truly on the go, like in the subway...with 901 the stack is huge, with 240 the optical connection is quite fragile. Any other options? I had tried ZX1 via USB but do not have it anymore, and it required 2 cables.

What I would like to know is if any portable amp really improves Hugo SQ?

The Rubarth album has a great recording but I base my choice of music on the music itself not recording quality, and to my taste it is...well not to my taste let's leave it at that.

 

[seeteeyou]

.