Whazzzup
Headphoneus Supremus
be prepared with the soap
Last edited:
Not yet having auditioned HUGO 2 I still really hope it sounds fuller and weightier than HUGO1 via my HE1000V2.For seemingly power hungry TOTL headphones such as the Hifiman 1000 V2 that may need more than the CHORD Hugo 2 can supply for larger sound stage, dynamics, improved bass impact/slam, I have come across several reasonably priced amps that others have reported good synergy with the HEK V2 in this regard including the MicroZOTL2 tube amp, the Violectric HPA V281, the Trilogy 931 (special order from England), the very inexpensive Schiit Jotunheim, and finally the Wells Audio Milo. Has anyone heard any of these with the HEK V2 and also with the Focal Utopias?? At the moment I am mostly considering the Vioelectric vs Milo. I have heard amazing things about the Trilogy but few reviews. The Vioelectric can drive two cans at once and powerful, the Milo is most tube like and perhaps better synergy with the Focals.
I know that the CH2 without any amplification is ideal for transparency but wanted more options to try.
Thanks
The HE1000 isn't really hard to drive, certainly not for the Hugo₂. The sonic result is not far behind the combination with the DAVE. Of course the latter sounds a bit more solid and authoritative, but that's with every headphone (HD 800, Grado PS1, Shure SE846, Campfire Andromeda), so it's not a matter of power. If you want options, try to steer away from the «power» concept – it's worth it.
Seriously, I could live with the Hugo₂ for all my headphones – if it had been launched before the DAVE, it would now probably be the heart of my system instead.
In the manual, filters 1 and 2 are shown as 256fs, and filters 3 and 4 are 16fs.
Does anyone know what fs stands for and what it does?
I've only had a few hours listening so far but H2 sounds brighter than H1 to my ears. The overall sound is leaner and tighter, especially the bass. Of course these are extremely early impressions that could be completely wrong. I suspect the sound would thicken/deepen with an optical source - I'm using my phone.
Can anyone suggest an cheap optical DAP? (not Astell&Kern - the older ones have horrible UI and the newer ones are too expensive!)
The HE1000 isn't really hard to drive, certainly not for the Hugo₂. The sonic result is not far behind the combination with the DAVE. Of course the latter sounds a bit more solid and authoritative, but that's with every headphone (HD 800, Grado PS1, Shure SE846, Campfire Andromeda), so it's not a matter of power. If you want options, try to steer away from the «power» concept – it's worth it.
Seriously, I could live with the Hugo₂ for all my headphones – if it had been launched before the DAVE, it would now probably be the heart of my system instead.
Christer: The Hugo₂ sounds fuller and warmer than the Hugo₁. While I wouldn't consider the original Hugo's tonal balance a downside with the HE1000, it's definitely not an ideal synergy with an unmodified HD 800 if you belong to the people who explicitly want to rely on component synergy. On another note, the Hugo₂'s distinct smoothness and treble refinement is a great match with the HE1000's treble characteristic apart from tonal-balance issues.
Note: I edited above text due to the misleading original wording. (Sorry!)
Just today I got the V2 pads for the HE1000 (finally they're available!). I haven't yet mounted and tried them, was too occupied with the Campfire Andromeda also picked up at the same time (preferred it over the Vega) – fantastic IEMs, but not free of (easily fixable) tonal issues. We'll see how much of a difference the new pads make! I suspect they're responsible for 85%, the rest goes to the thinner plywood frame and the closure of the gap between it and the pads (in my case already closed). Also, I'm sure my EQ curve already addresses the tonal-balance issues of the original HE1000. I'm curious about the effect of the stronger driver angling caused by the V2 pads, though.Imho the HE1000V2 is a very clear step above not only HD800 but also HE1000.
Fs = sampling rate, 16 & 256 means they're interpolating the signal by that many times, usually an interpolating FIR filter and can run it at a higher rate.
Maybe someone else can comment on this, but I suspect that filters 1&3 and 2&4 (hf roll-off) IRs are the same just ran at different rates. 16Fs giving you the feeling of a smoothing effect compared to 256Fs.
http://www.audioholics.com/audio-technologies/upsampling-vs-oversampling-for-digital-audio
Also there shouldnt be any difference between optical/usb unless EMI is an issue.
Don't get me wrong: I don't regret to have bought the DAVE one bit, and it sounds better than the Hugo₂ with all my headphones. It's just that if the Hugo₂ would have been first, most likely I wouldn't have invested that much money in an upgrade for the DAVE – my most expensive hi-fi purchase ever. Because I could absolutely be happy with the sound of the Hugo₂. I have never aspired the best system available, it just happens that now with the DAVE I'm close to it. However, I will happily pass on the Susvara and the Blu₂. Maybe a separate M-Scaler will be an option one day.that is quite the endorsement...
HiStupid question. I hadn't even considered using Bluetooth with my CH2. Are you using it to simply stream music from a computer instead of USB? If so, what's the difference in SQ between BT and USB and do you need anything special for the best quality on the computer side or standard BT supported by most new computers?
Don't get me wrong: I don't regret to have bought the DAVE one bit, and it sounds better than the Hugo₂ with all my headphones. It's just that if the Hugo₂ would have been first, most likely I wouldn't have invested that much money in an upgrade for the DAVE – my most expensive hi-fi purchase ever. Because I could absolutely be happy with the sound of the Hugo₂. I have never aspired the best system available, it just happens that now with the DAVE I'm close to it. However, I will happily pass on the Susvara and the Blu₂. Maybe a separate M-Scaler will be an option one day