[paul2qute]

As long as it's by Boxing Day I'm good

So what's the official date of release of the Hugo 2 in the UK?

 

[audi0nick128]

How would those 5% translate in terms of SNR in dB?
It seems Hugo 2 has an A-weighed value of 126 dB.
Which is the same as my current home DAC and now roughly five years old Benchmark DAC2 which in its new version DAC 3 boasts 128 dB SNR.
Hegel's DAC 30 boasts 140 dB SNR.
When the same magazine tested it they said it was the quietest DAC they had ever tested and they rated it very close to DAVE too in other respects.
It also costs roughly half of what DAVE costs.
I don't know the corresponding values for my Hugo, I find no such value mentioned online. I vaguely remember 122 dB or something similar? But apart from its much higher susceptability to really annoying interferences RF and such than both my earlier Hegel HD 25 and my current Benchmark DAC 2 which is very well isolated I have also found my Hugo to be noisier ie more hiss than the Benchmark both via headphones and when I still tried to use it in my home system.
I tried last week just to see if my memory had fooled me but was quickly disappointed by Hugo in my system, where it won't work with my best rca cable a Chord Indigo Plus cable which cost roughly as much as little Hugo when I got it.
I read a few posts back that even HUGO 2 seems to have problems accepting high end cables.
My Indigo Plus makes a night and day difference from my Audioquest cables in my system.
If HUGO 2 is both in need of additional expensive isolation units and even won't accept my Indigo Plus I may look elsewhere.
For me it is not enough if something is superior in theory. It needs to be so in practise to!
Unlike many here I will sit this out and test HUGO 2 thoroughly before committing,if at all.
I trust only my own ears and the most demanding test material large scale complex acoustic music.
Three years with HUGO has made me a bit wary and not a totally convinced fanboy any longer.
Sometimes it is better for" your wallet", to have some patience than jump onboard a new product carried away by all the hype around it..
Another thing that has me thinking a bit is how to interpret the need for those filters with HUGO 2 is, will I need to use them for
HI RES?
Is that where they are most needed?
And if so why?
I listen to 99 % of my music at 24/88.2 and above in pcm and some DSD.
Moreover does HUGO 2 really do DSD natively without any decimation?
The slight reservations I had with DAVE concerned some of my DSD masterfiles in particular.
I know how it sounded both live and at sessions playback and DAVE did indeed puzzle me there.
I have to admit I did not fully grasp Rob's post regarding those filters on HUGO 2.
I am after buying the HEK V2 pretty happy with the SQ I get from both My Benchmark and surprisingly with the best recordings, my SACD player too, not to mention my LP12 and many of my LPs. I am not really suffering from any serious "audiophilia nerviosa" at the moment.
I am basically enjoying my music a lot with the equipment I have.
I am not using HUGO at home. I know its limitations too well by now.
Well, if I could get my hands on a pair of those "Extreme Audio" MAAT Behemoth 300 pounds each speakers I auditioned during my last day in-Singapore about a month ago, I would be even closer to audiophile heaven than ever before.
The realistic bass from the two 15" bass cones on each side of two gigantic towers was the most effortless undistorted SQ I have ever heard from any speakers.
I will never be able to afford those speakers, but HUGO " sure, but first it will be put through some serious tests from me.

Yeah the black/silver noise post was a joke... rather obvious on second thought, still I fell for it...

Conserning isolation I remember Rob mentioned that galvanic isolation is less important for the design used in Hugo 2 and explained why a week ago.

But I would definitely try my existing isolator.
I don't see a big problem in the lack of galvanic isolation, since the implementation would need substantial power.

If you like a pair of 15' woofers in each of your speakers and don't want to rob a bank you might wanna take a look at these.
http://www.pureaudioproject.com/product/trio15-voxativ-open-baffle-speakers/

with about 96 db sensitivity I would try to drive them from Hugo2 directly...but maybe that's just me

Cheers

 

[Peter Hyatt]

some do not grasp

 

[audi0nick128]

Don't worry I don't.

Thanks for the Pep talk anyway

Cheers

 

[Liat]

Looks like someone in the UK is selling their silver Hugo 2.

Brexit was something I could grasp at least on a microscopic level.

But this

 

[JaZZ]

I have just picked mine up today. First it had to wait in its original box, protected against the sun in a backpack on the 28°C hot tennis court. At home I soon began to play with it. It sounded stunning from the first notes.

Soon I realized that it could even compete with the DAVE. Although it doesn't have exactly the same crystal-clarity and rock-solidity, it is amazingly close, particularly when it comes to the main criteria: musicality and listening pleasure. Moreover it shows the same smoothness and fine resolution resulting in a mesmerizing spatial depth thanks to the extremely clear distinguishability of «direct sound» and reverberation. Hugo¹ and Mojo sound flat in comparison – and fall flat in terms of musicality (as much as I regret to say so).

The Hugo² has more bass than Mojo and DAVE – therefore I decided to decrease the 31 Hz band by 0.4 dB and the 62 Hz band by 0.2 dB. Otherwise bass drums can sound a bit soft, compared to the Mojo, but it's solely a matter of frequency response. Another tonal deviation I noticed was the Hugo²'s slightly less pronounced mid-treble compared to the DAVE's, whereas the upper treble seemed equally present – nothing that seemed to be easily adjustable via equalizer, nor do I feel the need to do so.

Honestly, if I didn't already own a DAVE, I could perfectly live with the Hugo² as my end-game source/amp. The synergy with the HE1000 is great, not a trace of lacking «authority» compared to the DAVE (not to speak of lacking power). It certainly has some minor objective deficits, such as slightly lower transparency and substance behind the notes, but without direct comparison it's easily bearable, the more so as musicality doesn't suffer from it. Some may even prefer the Hugo²'s warmer timbre, its more «analogue» touch – like myself with certain tunes. So the Hugo² definitely seems to be a portable DAVE, closing the gap from the Hugo¹ to the latter by at least 66%, both tonally and qualitatively. This is of course my personal impression and valuation – after just a few hours of ownership.

The headphones I used for testing so far: HiFiMan HE1000, Sennheiser HD 800, Shure SE846, FiiO EX1. All were individually equalized for best results. I couldn't detect any hiss, not even with the SE846. However, with my high-frequency tinnitus (and its masking effect) I'm not the most reliable reference for this criterion. The digital data were provided by the FiiO X5 II via coaxial input.

 

[514077]

I have just picked mine up today. First it had to wait in its original box, protected against the sun in a backpack on the 28°C hot tennis court. At home I soon began to play with it. It sounded stunning from the first notes.



Soon I realized that it could even compete with the DAVE. Although it doesn't have exactly the same crystal-clarity and rock-solidity, it is amazingly close, particularly when it comes to the main criteria: musicality and listening pleasure. Moreover it shows the same smoothness and fine resolution resulting in a mesmerizing spatial depth thanks to the extremely clear distinguishability of «direct sound» and reverberation. Hugo¹ and Mojo sound flat in comparison – and fall flat in terms of musicality (as much as I regret to say so).

The Hugo² has more bass than Mojo and DAVE – therefore I decided to decrease the 31 Hz band by 0.4 dB and the 62 Hz band by 0.2 dB. Otherwise bass drums can sound a bit soft, compared to the Mojo, but it's solely a matter of frequency response. Another tonal deviation I noticed was the Hugo²'s slightly less pronounced mid-treble compared to the DAVE's, whereas the upper treble seemed equally present – nothing that seemed to be easily adjustable via equalizer, nor do I feel the need to do so.

Honestly, if I didn't already own a DAVE, I could perfectly live with the Hugo² as my end-game source/amp. The synergy with the HE1000 is great, not a trace of lacking «authority» compared to the DAVE (not to speak of lacking power). It certainly has some minor objective deficits, such as slightly lower transparency and substance behind the notes, but without direct comparison it's easily bearable, the more so as musicality doesn't suffer from it. Some may even prefer the Hugo²'s warmer timbre, its more «analogue» touch – like myself with certain tunes. So the Hugo² definitely seems to be a portable DAVE, closing the gap from the Hugo¹ to the latter by at least 66%, both tonally and qualitatively. This is of course my personal impression and valuation – after just a few hours of ownership.

The headphones I used for testing so far: HiFiMan HE1000, Sennheiser HD 800, Shure SE846, FiiO EX1. All were individually equalized for best results. I couldn't detect any hiss, not even with the SE846. However, with my high-frequency tinnitus (and its masking effect) I'm not the most reliable reference for this criterion. The digital data were provided by the FiiO X5 II via coaxial input.

Great and to the point. My only consern when you speak of a less-emphasized mid treble, is how my LCD-X will respond to the H2. But that's my problem. Guess a bit of EQ wouldn't hurt if needed.
Thanks, JaZZ.

 

[jmills8]

I have just picked mine up today. First it had to wait in its original box, protected against the sun in a backpack on the 28°C hot tennis court. At home I soon began to play with it. It sounded stunning from the first notes.



Soon I realized that it could even compete with the DAVE. Although it doesn't have exactly the same crystal-clarity and rock-solidity, it is amazingly close, particularly when it comes to the main criteria: musicality and listening pleasure. Moreover it shows the same smoothness and fine resolution resulting in a mesmerizing spatial depth thanks to the extremely clear distinguishability of «direct sound» and reverberation. Hugo¹ and Mojo sound flat in comparison – and fall flat in terms of musicality (as much as I regret to say so).

The Hugo² has more bass than Mojo and DAVE – therefore I decided to decrease the 31 Hz band by 0.4 dB and the 62 Hz band by 0.2 dB. Otherwise bass drums can sound a bit soft, compared to the Mojo, but it's solely a matter of frequency response. Another tonal deviation I noticed was the Hugo²'s slightly less pronounced mid-treble compared to the DAVE's, whereas the upper treble seemed equally present – nothing that seemed to be easily adjustable via equalizer, nor do I feel the need to do so.

Honestly, if I didn't already own a DAVE, I could perfectly live with the Hugo² as my end-game source/amp. The synergy with the HE1000 is great, not a trace of lacking «authority» compared to the DAVE (not to speak of lacking power). It certainly has some minor objective deficits, such as slightly lower transparency and substance behind the notes, but without direct comparison it's easily bearable, the more so as musicality doesn't suffer from it. Some may even prefer the Hugo²'s warmer timbre, its more «analogue» touch – like myself with certain tunes. So the Hugo² definitely seems to be a portable DAVE, closing the gap from the Hugo¹ to the latter by at least 66%, both tonally and qualitatively. This is of course my personal impression and valuation – after just a few hours of ownership.

The headphones I used for testing so far: HiFiMan HE1000, Sennheiser HD 800, Shure SE846, FiiO EX1. All were individually equalized for best results. I couldn't detect any hiss, not even with the SE846. However, with my high-frequency tinnitus (and its masking effect) I'm not the most reliable reference for this criterion. The digital data were provided by the FiiO X5 II via coaxial input.

what did you mean by this "
The Hugo² has more bass than Mojo and DAVE – therefore I decided to decrease the 31 Hz band by 0.4 dB and the 62 Hz band by 0.2 dB. Otherwise bass drums can sound a bit soft" is the Hugo2 bass stronger than the Mojo so you decreased the bass?

 

[JaZZ]

what did you mean by this "The Hugo² has more bass than Mojo and DAVE – therefore I decided to decrease the 31 Hz band by 0.4 dB and the 62 Hz band by 0.2 dB. Otherwise bass drums can sound a bit soft"
Is the Hugo2 bass stronger than the Mojo so you decreased the bass?

Yes, exactly.

 

[x RELIC x]

what did you mean by this "
The Hugo² has more bass than Mojo and DAVE – therefore I decided to decrease the 31 Hz band by 0.4 dB and the 62 Hz band by 0.2 dB. Otherwise bass drums can sound a bit soft" is the Hugo2 bass stronger than the Mojo so you decreased the bass?

Yes, exactly.

0.2dB and 0.4dB is hardly an Earth shattering difference, and lets keep in mind how meticulous @JaZZ is about his EQ.

 

[Whazzzup]

Sooo then i guess i got to upgrade

 

[Dvdlucena]

...

 

[ecapsretliab]

Well that was all very grumpy. My happy-go-optimistic-bubble has been violated.

 

[musickid]

Complete pre-orchestrated spiel designed and timed to coincide with the launch of hugo 2. modi multibit is nice, no doubt that it isn't. i use to own one and in some ways compares to mojo. however mojo is more three dimensional and involving and warmer than modi multibit imho. this comparison can be scaled up to hugo and gunjnir multibit however here i admit to only hearing hugo. i did have the option of buying a gunjnir multibit but chose hugo 2 with no hesitation at all after auditioning hugo. hugo also beats handsdown moon 230HAD and Naim V1 which use industry available dac chips. see my report from March. it was a single half hour trial of hugo back in March which led to me joining this thread and placing a preorder for hugo 2. the evidence speaks for itself no fanboy nonsense here.

putting that aside two small points if someone can help me. 1) what is the policy should hugo 2 develop a fault during warranty period and after it passes warranty period? 2) audioquest make cheap entry level micro usb cables which are usb 3 compliant, is there any disadvantage in using a usb 3 cable for digital audio even though its backward compliant to usb 2. seems strange to me? thanks to all.

 

[Whazzzup]

Sooo i shouldnt upgrade