Anyone here have an Iphone and use the Hugo 2 bluetooth? I am interested in how the bluetooth quality compares since Apple doesn't all users to use aptX.
Currently I have the Mojo/Poly and the bluetooth is...meah and the Poly is stupid confusing to use. Does the Hugo 2 have the same bluetooth issues, or is it a bit of a smoother user experience?
So I know what you mean. I find that when I play lossless music or AAC podcasts on my iPhone, my Jabra Elite Active 65t seems to get a better AAC lossy signal than my Hugo 2 SBC Bluetooth codec from the iPhone. Obviously, the sound is still better on the Hugo 2 but you can sense that there is something off about the encode.
On the other hand, if you care about lossless music playback, why not just directly wire your iPhone to your Hugo 2? Yes. I know that with the iPhone to the Mojo directly, if your phone is in a low cellular signal area, it seems that there will be something that causes the Mojo to have the odd sound here and there, presumably from the burst of noise from the cellular connection from iPhone to cell tower. I usually try to make sure the iPhone is placed far apart from the Mojo and I almost always get great sound. However, with Hugo 2's larger chassis, improved shielding and improved RF filtering at the USB, I just tried the iPhone hooked up to the Hugo 2 and kept on waving the iPhone on the Hugo 2 and I couldn't get any odd sounds.
So I know what you mean. I find that when I play lossless music or AAC podcasts on my iPhone, my Jabra Elite Active 65t seems to get a better AAC lossy signal than my Hugo 2 SBC Bluetooth codec from the iPhone. Obviously, the sound is still better on the Hugo 2 but you can sense that there is something off about the encode.
On the other hand, if you care about lossless music playback, why not just directly wire your iPhone to your Hugo 2? Yes. I know that with the iPhone to the Mojo directly, if your phone is in a low cellular signal area, it seems that there will be something that causes the Mojo to have the odd sound here and there, presumably from the burst of noise from the cellular connection from iPhone to cell tower. I usually try to make sure the iPhone is placed far apart from the Mojo and I almost always get great sound. However, with Hugo 2's larger chassis, improved shielding and improved RF filtering at the USB, I just tried the iPhone hooked up to the Hugo 2 and kept on waving the iPhone on the Hugo 2 and I couldn't get any odd sounds.
I actually never knew that about the signal interference and the Mojo, so thanks for letting me know.
Hardwiring TOTL DAPs/AMPs is totally the best way to go, but when I work I have to move around a lot, so it just isn't practical for me to hookup and unhook DAP/AMPs, which is why I like the idea of the Mojo/Poly, but honestly it just doesn't work that well as a streaming device. I was looking to upgrade to the Hugo 2 (which I love the sound of), but the only thing holding me back is how bad of a user experience the Mojo/Poly is. I am planning on streaming from either my Iphone 11 pro, or 1 of 2 other laptops. I also travel a lot and like the idea of being able to just pack up the Hugo 2 and have the best audio everywhere.
I'm having a hardtime getting it to work consistently, I am pretty sure it is setup because when I play somthing in Tidal I am able to click the output and select my Poly's name, but it cuts out all the time, and this is on a very stable network.
I'm having a hardtime getting it to work consistently, I am pretty sure it is setup because when I play somthing in Tidal I am able to click the output and select my Poly's name, but it cuts out all the time, and this is on a very stable network.
First, I don't own a Poly. Because I don't have a 2.4GHz WiFi network at home. And most of the 2.4GHz WiFi at work are fairly unstable and require complicated log-in procedure. Although I usually log in with my iPad and then stream Tidal from my iPad to Hugo 2.
My gut feeling is that your WiFi network feels stable because your iPhone is logging onto the 5GHz Wifi so it is super stable to you but because Poly can only support 2.4GHz WiFi, that is the network issue you're describing. Hard to know. Personally, in this day and age, unless you live in the middle of nowhere, I don't believe there is such a thing as a stable 2.4GHz WiFi network. Your neighbors' routers are frequently interfering with you in the 2.4GHz band.
I also wanted to say that Hugo 2 is huge. As in substantially larger than Poly/Mojo. So I don't know how "mobile" you need to be. If you can carry the Hugo 2 on your utility belt, I'm sure you can just wire your iPhone to the Hugo 2 as the iPhone would take up virtually no space. Just saying.
I'm having a hardtime getting it to work consistently, I am pretty sure it is setup because when I play somthing in Tidal I am able to click the output and select my Poly's name, but it cuts out all the time, and this is on a very stable network.
First, I don't own a Poly. Because I don't have a 2.4GHz WiFi network at home. And most of the 2.4GHz WiFi at work are fairly unstable and require complicated log-in procedure. Although I usually log in with my iPad and then stream Tidal from my iPad to Hugo 2.
My gut feeling is that your WiFi network feels stable because your iPhone is logging onto the 5GHz Wifi so it is super stable to you but because Poly can only support 2.4GHz WiFi, that is the network issue you're describing. Hard to know. Personally, in this day and age, unless you live in the middle of nowhere, I don't believe there is such a thing as a stable 2.4GHz WiFi network. Your neighbors' routers are frequently interfering with you in the 2.4GHz band.
I also wanted to say that Hugo 2 is huge. As in substantially larger than Poly/Mojo. So I don't know how "mobile" you need to be. If you can carry the Hugo 2 on your utility belt, I'm sure you can just wire your iPhone to the Hugo 2 as the iPhone would take up virtually no space. Just saying.
Both of the places I try to connect via WiFi have both 5 and 2.4GHz networks. 2.4GHz isn't as antiquated as most people think, it is slower, but it does work in a larger area, additionally it encounters less interference than 5.0GHz making it a more stable network choice for devices like phones and the Poly, because they aren't really receiving massive amounts of data, but they tend to move around a lot, so they benefit from the reduced interference and larger usable area...they even make tri-routers with additional freqs to diminish interference.Anyway I'm not trying to be a dick, but most people write off 2.4GHz as being less stable, when it is actually better for certain applications.
But, yeah, I'm connected to the 2.4GHz network and the signal is very strong.
Hi
I have just auditioned a Hugo 2 and took my Mojo along with me. I used a set of Shure 1840. I had the original Hugo a while ago which I used with various iems and a pair of AKG 812
The Hugo 2 sounded more spacious than the mojo and a bit more resolving. To be fair though, not a million miles apart, which supervised me. I wasn’t instantly blown away, perhaps the Hugo 2 is a grower. I remember being more impressed with the Hugo.
Perhaps the 1840s don’t sit well with the H2.
What are your thoughts
+++ battery-powered source (reminder: chi-fi/j-fi/A&K daps implementation of optical is likely poor. if you are working with a budget, low priority of optical would likely lead to cheap optical parts chosen over HQ implementation of optical. Music server >>>>> music player over optical. No BS barebones Android resampling to worry about... just bit-perfect goodness. )
+++ optical (glass >>>>> plastic).
So to answer your question, theoretically there is no mechanism for a battery powered source to create noise floor modulation via RF noise, and this has indeed been verified with listening tests comparing optical to USB. Optical of course is the ideal source, as it's impossible to inject currents from the source to the DAC ground plane.
Hi
I have just auditioned a Hugo 2 and took my Mojo along with me. I used a set of Shure 1840. I had the original Hugo a while ago which I used with various iems and a pair of AKG 812
The Hugo 2 sounded more spacious than the mojo and a bit more resolving. To be fair though, not a million miles apart, which supervised me. I wasn’t instantly blown away, perhaps the Hugo 2 is a grower. I remember being more impressed with the Hugo.
Perhaps the 1840s don’t sit well with the H2.
What are your thoughts
First, if you use the orange or red filter, H2 would sound closer to Mojo than the white or green filter. I personally prefer green. Second, I find that the longer you listen to Chord DACs, the more you get what the sonic differences are and the more you can’t live without it. Because basically the improvements you get from the increases in tap lengths are not audible with other DACs so sometimes the ears don’t know what you’re listening for. Third which is the most important is that different people have different thresholds on whether Hugo 2 is worth the extra money and because I only use Mojo for work and travel, it took me a long time to decide to upgrade. Bottom line is that I don’t think 1840 is the problem. Every headphone I own can separate Hugo 2 from Mojo quite distinctly.
Yes. But I’ve been listening to Blu2/DAVE at home for a long time so over time, I just found the difference between Mojo to Blu2/DAVE to be too great so I caved and got Hugo 2 for work. I think Hugo 2 is much closer to DAVE than it is to Mojo.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
