[514077]

I copied this (with minor adjustments) over from the Qutest thread because I think it's important.



The output graph of frequency and amplitude, interested me. It shows that the Qutest has a flat response, which to me is ideal. It means you have a reference source, and any bass or treble emphasis is coming from other components. Better to have at least one component as reference, for me, anyway.

However it also demonstrates what quite a few of us in the Hugo2 thread have been saying all along. That the Hugo 2 has a perfectly flat response. While some others have been trying to imply that the Hugo 2 is bright. I think they were trying to troll Chord, and or, are in denial about the rest of their partnering equipment.

Also reviews of the Hugo 2 and Qutest are off the charts in complementary terms. It's a shame that a few headfiers seem to be trying to spoil it for the rest of people.

I personally find the Hugo 2 rich in timbre. Not as rich as the TT2 will be, but the Hugo 2 is a fine DAC. Right away from the minute I plugged put music through it, I knew it was right and said so. (I remember @x RELIC x saying the Hugo 2 was 'bang on neutral', and I agreed.) I remember hardly being able to believe my ears. I was initially outfaced by the Hugo 2's detail, and knew it would take time to adjust. It took a month. Still however, just over one year later, the Hugo 2 still stuns and surprises me every time I use it.

I have to say, that for the most part, I don't believe that people were trying to troll Chord. Whether the music to which they listened maty have been overcooked in the treble, their various headphones may have had a high emphasus or their ears may be sensitive to highs, they'd feel that H2 wasn't for them. On some types of music, my Angies through H2, almost hurt my ears at moderate-low levels, with a peculiar distortion that makes me think I might hav a bit of tinitis or something. In short, I think most negative comments are honest.
As for me: I like the sound I've gotten from both Hugos; the H2 taking it to a higher level. So, I'm able to determine for myself, that someone who states there's no diference between them, isn't hearing things as I do. Therefore, I don't need to take their opinions to heart. For my part, I see no need to mask the Hugo2 with an external amp, as my HPs don't need the extra power nor do I want to corrupt the sound of my H2. If others disagree, or honestly feel differently, here's to ya.,

 

[Hooster]

However it also demonstrates what quite a few of us in the Hugo2 thread have been saying all along. That the Hugo 2 has a perfectly flat response. While some others have been trying to imply that the Hugo 2 is bright. I think they were trying to troll Chord, and or, are in denial about the rest of their partnering equipment.

Any modern DAC has a frequency response that for all intents and purposes is perfectly flat. Headphones are where you will see variations in frequency response. If someone is saying that the Hugo2 is bright, then they are talking about the sound quality of the treble, not the quantity. They are not saying that the level of the high frequencies is measurably higher than the level of low frequencies. They are saying that the treble has a quality that makes it sound bright/harsh to them. Saying that people who are honestly sharing their opinion are trolling is not a healthy contribution to a discussion about an audio component. We should be grateful to people who contribute, even the ones who may not be saying exactly what we want to hear.

 

[betula]

Since their secondhand prices got more or less identical I was wondering what the consensus is regarding Hugo2 or TT1 for desktop use. (Apart from the obvious.) Did Hugo2 exceed the sq all Hugo1, 2Qute and TT1? Or TT1 still offers a better sound compared to Hugo1/Hugo2/2Qute/Qutest?

 

[miketlse]

Since their secondhand prices got more or less identical I was wondering what the consensus is regarding Hugo2 or TT1 for desktop use. (Apart from the obvious.) Did Hugo2 exceed the sq all Hugo1, 2Qute and TT1? Or TT1 still offers a better sound compared to Hugo1/Hugo2/2Qute/Qutest?

I don't think that there is a consensus at present:

• I have discovered that the Hugo2 can direct drive my Focal 936 (much to my surprise), and am on a plateau exploring this setup
• Others such as @Whazzzup are very pro the TT sound signature, and the uk offers like this, are a great opportunity to try the TT

I can only speak for myself. Some head-fiers want to try new kit every two weeks. Myself, I discovered that Mojo was a great dac to plateau and explore for a year. Now I have plateaued on the Hugo 2, and keep exploring new ways to use it, and better speakers to direct drive. This keeps finding reasons to delay moving to TT2.
I have tried to point posters in the direction of the last end-of-line 2Qute and TT, because they represent undreamed of opportunities to enjoy music, compared to just 3 years ago, at difficult to refuse prices.
Like others, we can just propose dacs to demo. I was intending to buy a TT, but opted for a Hugo 2 at half the then price of a TT.
Two years down the road, at today's prices, then maybe the TT is the gear for you.

 

[Vampa]

The FAQ IN POST #3 of the Mojo thread contains some info relating to coaxial plugs and cables (see below).
Usually if there are issues, they are caused by using wrong plug, and changing to a cable with the correct plug solves the issue.
Hopefully one of the posters here will be familiar with the M9, and can help you.

Here are the signal paths for an appropriate Co-Axial cable to connect Fiio X3ii and X5ii DAPs to Mojos Co-Axial digital input:


(pin-out identities based upon these: www.head-fi.org/t/784602/14985#post_12467535 )

IMPORTANT: James (CEO of Fiio) has privately confirmed to me that the above diagram is definitely correct for X3ii, X5ii, and X7

Finally!! Many thanks! this pictured saved me. Got it to work using the Fiio L21 cable and the RCA to 3.5mm adaptor I got from Amazon.

As additional info: I have done some comparison between USB and coaxial from the M9 into the Hugo 2 and do not think I could differentiate them in a blind test. Both equally good to me.

 

[miketlse]

Finally!! Many thanks! this pictured saved me. Got it to work using the Fiio L21 cable and the RCA to 3.5mm adaptor I got from Amazon.

As additional info: I have done some comparison between USB and coaxial from the M9 into the Hugo 2 and do not think I could differentiate them in a blind test. Both equally good to me.

Confusion about the plugs did cause issues for some owners, but understanding the plugs does make it easier to understand why some cables/plugs do not work well.

 

[Progisus]

I don't think that there is a consensus at present:

• I have discovered that the Hugo2 can direct drive my Focal 936 (much to my surprise), and am on a plateau exploring this setup
• Others such as @Whazzzup are very pro the TT sound signature, and the uk offers like this, are a great opportunity to try the TT

I can only speak for myself. Some head-fiers want to try new kit every two weeks. Myself, I discovered that Mojo was a great dac to plateau and explore for a year. Now I have plateaued on the Hugo 2, and keep exploring new ways to use it, and better speakers to direct drive. This keeps finding reasons to delay moving to TT2.
I have tried to point posters in the direction of the last end-of-line 2Qute and TT, because they represent undreamed of opportunities to enjoy music, compared to just 3 years ago, at difficult to refuse prices.
Like others, we can just propose dacs to demo. I was intending to buy a TT, but opted for a Hugo 2 at half the then price of a TT.
Two years down the road, at today's prices, then maybe the TT is the gear for you.

Just did another extended listening comparing TT to Hugo2 with Utopia, Hd650, tia fourte and IE800. Totally subjective but to me the TT still wins for enjoyment and the 2 for detail.

 

[ZappaMan]

Is the original tt - mscaler compatible ?

 

[Mediahound]

Is the original tt - mscaler compatible ?

Nope, just the Hugo 2 (with adapters), Cutest and Hugo TT 2, directly via BNC.

 

[514077]

Just did another extended listening comparing TT to Hugo2 with Utopia, Hd650, tia fourte and IE800. Totally subjective but to me the TT still wins for enjoyment and the 2 for detail.

That actually sounds reasonable and plausible. The original TT has those super caps and whatever else gives it a leg up on amplification. Makes me wish I could at least try a TT2 one day.

 

[PANURUS]

Is the original tt - mscaler compatible ?

With optical @192khz.

 

[GreenBow]

If anyone's interested, the Chord Ultima amplifier system is reviewed in Issue Feb 2019 of HiFi News.

 

[Whazzzup]

Tt has a single bnc, so sure m scaler works. So do servers on tt.

 

[Currawong]

I copied this (with minor adjustments) over from the Qutest thread because I think it's important.

The output graph of frequency and amplitude, interested me. It shows that the Qutest has a flat response, which to me is ideal. It means you have a reference source, and any bass or treble emphasis is coming from other components. Better to have at least one component as reference, for me, anyway.

However it also demonstrates what quite a few of us in the Hugo2 thread have been saying all along. That the Hugo 2 has a perfectly flat response. While some others have been trying to imply that the Hugo 2 is bright. I think they were trying to troll Chord, and or, are in denial about the rest of their partnering equipment.

Also reviews of the Hugo 2 and Qutest are off the charts in complementary terms. It's a shame that a few headfiers seem to be trying to spoil it for the rest of people.

I personally find the Hugo 2 rich in timbre. Not as rich as the TT2 will be, but the Hugo 2 is a fine DAC. Right away from the minute I plugged put music through it, I knew it was right and said so. (I remember @x RELIC x saying the Hugo 2 was 'bang on neutral', and I agreed.) I remember hardly being able to believe my ears. I was initially outfaced by the Hugo 2's detail, and knew it would take time to adjust. It took a month. Still however, just over one year later, the Hugo 2 still stuns and surprises me every time I use it.

A Soundaware D300REF transport/streamer arrived yesterday, and I played around comparing different transport set-ups with it. The different set-ups were:

1. Raspberry Pi with Dietpi > Schiit Wyrd > USB.
2. iMac Mini 2012 > iFi iUSB 3.0 (with linear PSU) > Singxer F1 > coax 1.
3. Soundaware D300REF networked > coax 2.

There was nothing in it between 1 and 2. Using the D300REF results in better instrument reproduction -- they just sound more real. It's not dramatic, but subtle.

I think what is causing the "bright" comments with the Hugo 2 is the transport/source some people were using, especially given the Hugo 2's USB input isn't isolated, and harshness can come across as brightness (and false detail). A VERY obvious example is to get a very long, very poor quality optical cable and connect with that. I did as much with a Sony cable here that I have that wont transmit 192k. The sound is harsh and unpleasant. I speculate that the internal circuits, in an effort to deal with the massive jitter, generate a lot of noise that gets through to the analog side.

On the other hand, even with a reasonable transport, such as most DAPs, the sound is great. With an excellent transport, better still.

 

[Triode User]

Tt has a single bnc, so sure m scaler works. So do servers on tt.

Sure, but not at it's optimium 1M taps. A chord dac with dual data inputs is required for that.