[dmance]

On Chord's Hugo2 web page I noticed the number of taps indicated has increased to 49,195. This is up from 49,152 mentioned up to now (including from RW himself).
Typo?...Or the benefit of Rob's last minute enhancements?
***Well I notice now that both numbers are present in different places on the page. Glaring typo, obviously ***

 

[maxh22]

On Chord's Hugo2 web page I noticed the number of taps indicated has increased to 49,195. This is up from 49,152 mentioned up to now (including from RW himself).
Typo?...Or the benefit of Rob's last minute enhancements?

You are right. There appears to be a typo since there are two different tap lengths for 'Features' and 'Technical Spec'
 


 
The first page says 49,152 so that's the correct one..

 

[SearchOfSub]

Well, 1 Watt from Hugo 2 into 85dB/W efficient speakers that lust for 300W, like my ATC SCM20SL. Can that possibly sound ok? Maybe that is ok with Singer/Songwriter material, but how about Piano, or Bruckner or Mahler Symphonies? I am tempted to try, but that means hassle with cables/adapters. 
Would you be able to offer more experiences to motivate me?

Well, 1 Watt from Hugo 2 into 85dB/W efficient speakers that lust for 300W, like my ATC SCM20SL. Can that possibly sound ok? Maybe that is ok with Singer/Songwriter material, but how about Piano, or Bruckner or Mahler Symphonies? I am tempted to try, but that means hassle with cables/adapters. 
Would you be able to offer more experiences to motivate me?

My speakers were 89db at 6ohm and it drove them fine in a 10x11x10 room. I listen alone most of the time and I do not listen loud at all. Especially Hugo had good details at lower volumes so it wasn't frustrating at all listening at low - mid volume. Never had any instances where I felt any urge to turn up the volume since I think my ears knew it was listening to quality. Case might be different for you depending on rest of your setup.

 

[Triode User]

Well, hmmm... Since there's no substitute for experiential knowledge I suppose I'll have to take your word that the added distortion from your DAVE + Tube amps has an optimal sound, just like you would have to do the same for those going "ampless" with Chord DACs, yes?

I'm not be sarcastic here; I'm just saying, all things considered.

I wouldn't really call 85db speakers all that efficient, compared to 95db speakers, but that's just me. I think the point has always been to drive passive speakers in the 93-98db range straight from the DAC, but I could be mistaken.

Over in the DAVE thread Rob has promised to measure the output wattage of the DAVE going into 8ohms as soon as he gets back from Asia. He doesn't have those figures, so it will be curious to see what he comes up with.

I think the bottom line is that the figures are important but more than that you have to use your ears. Notice how many times Rob refers to the exhaustive listening tests he does to fine tune and tweak.
 
I went to the WigWam HiFi show at the weekend at Scalford in the UK. There were many fine systems there, some with very fine performance figures on paper including room equalised systems but when I went back home my Dave with tube amps sounded so much better than all of them. Mine is tuneful, fast and with space around the instruments and not all congested in the mid range. It just sounds so musical. The influence of the Dave was minimised because I took my Dave and put it in quite a few of the systems.
 
There are many ways to get great music from audio systems. Some will have tubes, some will have ss amps and some will not have any power amps at all and will rely on efficient speakers driven direct from Hugo2 / Dave etc. But above all, I don't get too excited about published performance figures because they don't tell the whole story.

 

[Hooster]

Technically, no, I don't think it does.

 
Let's not get caught up in a silly semantic squabble. Just study the definition of a headphone amplifier and things will become clear to you.

 

[Hooster]

  I had had Dynaudio speakers with 86db efficiency.
For me it is horribly compressed, dead, lifeless sound.
I listened number of Dynaudio an Morel speakers. the sound was the same.
I never be back to dynamic speakers with such low sensitivity.
For me, high sensitivity always sound better in term of musicality.
In my opinion, the worst things happened in modern audio are fashion for low sensitivity speakers and belt drive turntables (which ruin PRAT in music).

 
Just get an amp that can do the job. There is nothing wrong with those speakers.

 

[bflat]

I just connect the Hugo output directly to my brain via a neuro cable. It looks similar to this:
 

 
You can clearly see the red colored ball of the Hugo up top.

 

[AlexB73]

Thank you for invitation. 
I live Ottawa Canada.

 

[AlexB73]

   
Just get an amp that can do the job. There is nothing wrong with those speakers.

Yes of course. I know it.
I prefer SE tube amp with high sensitivity speakers. 
Low sensitivity dynamic (not electrostatic) speakers is not my cup of tea.

 

[6RS]

 
Low sensitivity dynamic (not electrostatic) speakers is not my cup of tea.

Actually, my previous speakers were Quad ESL 63. I loved them, but they were too bulky.  The midrange of the ATC comes close, and they have their own magic. However, the original tweeter was bad. This is why I replaced them with a Mundorf AMT. Notably, ATC also realized this weakness. They developed their own tweeter in the meantime. I also listened to Dynaudio, but they sounded too artificial, like plastic surgery. Sorry for digressing...

 

[Light - Man]

  Actually, my previous speakers were Quad ESL 63. I loved them, but they were too bulky.  The midrange of the ATC comes close, and they have their own magic. However, the original tweeter was bad. This is why I replaced them with a Mundorf AMT. Notably, ATC also realized this weakness. They developed their own tweeter in the meantime. I also listened to Dynaudio, but they sounded too artificial, like plastic surgery. Sorry for digressing...

 ? 

 

[Hooster]

 I also listened to Dynaudio, but they sounded too artificial, like plastic surgery. Sorry for digressing...

 
I know what you mean. They sound like that when they have not been run in. It goes away after a while.

 

[AlexB73]

  Actually, my previous speakers were Quad ESL 63. I loved them, but they were too bulky.  The midrange of the ATC comes close, and they have their own magic. However, the original tweeter was bad. This is why I replaced them with a Mundorf AMT. Notably, ATC also realized this weakness. They developed their own tweeter in the meantime. I also listened to Dynaudio, but they sounded too artificial, like plastic surgery. Sorry for digressing...

I listened ESL57 in systems of other people. I like these speakers a lot.
 
Most disapointed components in my system were:
1. Dynaudio Audience 60 
2. Plinius 8200 integrated amplifier.
3. Nottingham Analog Spacedeck Turntable.
 
Most excited components that I had had in my system in the past, were:
1. Lenco L78 turntable
2. McIntosh MC30 monoblocks
3. EAR 834P phonostage
4. Spendor 2/3  

 

[flyte3333]

Will the remote control of the Hugo2 allow volume control? So can connect it directly to a power amp and control the volume from your chair?

Sent from my Blackberry DTEK50 using Tapatalk

 

[Phil Townsend]

Do we have a ship date for Hugo 2????