[SearchOfSub]

I'm curious why you feel it was only appropriate for older recordings with Hugo 1. Even if you get better soundstage depth with the Hugo 2, wouldn't you still want it on regardless with the Hugo 1? Or do the negatives of it outweigh the positives?

This has me wondering what percentage of people here use it. I listen exclusively to the Sony Z1R's with the Hugo 2 and still can't decide if I like crossfeed on or not. It's hard to shake the notion that I'm hearing a less "pure" sound with crossfeed on. MacedonianHero, have you been listening to the Z1R's on your Hugo 2 or Dave with crossfeed on? And maybe I don't want to know the answer to this, but how are the Z1R's on the Dave compared to the Hugo 2?

IMO crossfeed OFF is always the best option. Its artificial IMO and purity is really what we all strive to get anyway. Even though you get lesser stage depth etc, if you want the recording as is what the artist intended, crossfeed OFF is best.

 

[Jawed]

Using "normal" recordings, crossfeed had no real benefit on Hugo 1 - I could not hear a change in depth.

I use HD 800 S and with Hugo TT there was a clear change in "depth" as well as a narrowing with crossfeed, so I'm surprised that you found Hugo unable to render a change in depth. I think it was probably due to the headphones.

When upgrading to DAVE, with crossfeed off and the same headphones, there was a significant increase in depth. It's very common to feel as though I'm not wearing headphones because the presentation of the recording seems to be in the space around me, and not coming from little speakers attached to my ears. It's quite beguiling, as the sound is bigger in all directions around me and has a beautiful, open, freedom.

You raise some interesting questions regarding crossfeed.

I'm in complete agreement with you (apart from the fact I don't own any commercial recordings where I was present during recording, so don't have that kind of perspective) and feel that although crossfeed can make an attractive difference in presentation, it significantly alters the musical balance of a recording. The bass lift is the most obvious, followed by a muddying of the bass and creating a generally, slightly congested, feel.

The brain uses 3D perception of sound to distinguish different parts in sound, e.g. different musical instruments playing simultaneously. I find crossfeed hurts this ability. This video exaggerates the effect somewhat, but the huge increase in intelligibility as it changes from mono to binaural shows how important spatial presentation is:

 

[dmance]

...for anybody using headphones, watch this video , the whole video is great - stuff about psycho acoustics starts around 3:15.

 

[flyte3333]

Hi Rob @Rob Watts

Does the Hugo 2 need to be charged for 10+ hours before first use, like was advised for the Mojo?

Is that better for it's battery or it doesn't matter for Hugo 2?

Cheers!

 

[Christer]

...for anybody using headphones, watch this video , the whole video is great - stuff about psycho acoustics starts around 3:15.

Thanks, for posting it.
That video among other things explains why I clearly prefer open over ear headphones.
I'll have to check out the mics he uses for his projects.
I have made some recordings with my little mics at my years in rainforests recording gibbons and birds and I managed to capture a bit more directional information than via my mics just placed on my camera tripod.
To reasonably accurately locate sounds in space we use and need our outer ears, IEMs bypass our outer ears.
Nor do I like to stick stuff into my ear canals.
I listen almost exclusively to acoustic music recorded or performed live in real acoustic venues and I want that experience recreated as accurately as possible when listening to recordings. And interesting as it may sound sometimes,crossfeed tends to tamper with the original spatial information captured.
One "dis"/"advantage" of crossfeed is the bass lift at least with HUGO 1 where set to its its highest level you get a bit of a bass boost that adds a bit of weight to its sometimes too thin signature.
But I dislike the bass instruments "meeting in the middle" and the added distortion.
Real simply miked Stereo via speakers can get quite close to how we hear things live. But both mch 5,1 or even better 7.1 with the height dimension included comes closer to how we actually hear things spatially.
Via headphones the best and closest to how we actually hear is binaural imho.

 

[Ike1985]

So I've been demoing the Hugo2. One of the biggest frustrations with the Mojo is that with my S8E, the only app that can send it audio is UAPP via it's proprietary driver. Now I can finally run bandcamp to a Chord device again (Mojo worked fine with S7E). This is a huge selling point for me. A18 and Zeus pair magnificently with hugo2. Incredible sounding device, it's going to be very difficult to let this go and know what I'm missing now. In a very real sense, I wish I'd never heard it before. I am very tempted to sell a ton of stuff and put all that toward Hugo2. Now if only Chord had B stock!

Some of you have said you don't notice much difference between the filters, I can definitely tell a difference with my A18's and Zeus XR's. It isn't night and day but I can definitely tell when switching between filters. Crossfeed is a more dramatic effect, I like it with and without crossfeed but I'm leaning toward without because of the shrinkage in stage.

But part of me is like wait for Hugo3...

What are everyone's thoughts regarding Bluetooth quality from Hugo2? I'm just listening to Mp3's streaming on bandcamp and it sounds great. For higher quality listening I'll run UAPP to mojo via Usb-c Micro-b cable.

Also, just to be clear. If I want the most natural and unfiltered sound that would be with these settings right?

filter: white
crossfeed: off/light purple

 

[Christer]

I use HD 800 S and with Hugo TT there was a clear change in "depth" as well as a narrowing with crossfeed, so I'm surprised that you found Hugo unable to render a change in depth. I think it was probably due to the headphones.

When upgrading to DAVE, with crossfeed off and the same headphones, there was a significant increase in depth. It's very common to feel as though I'm not wearing headphones because the presentation of the recording seems to be in the space around me, and not coming from little speakers attached to my ears. It's quite beguiling, as the sound is bigger in all directions around me and has a beautiful, open, freedom.


I'm in complete agreement with you (apart from the fact I don't own any commercial recordings where I was present during recording, so don't have that kind of perspective) and feel that although crossfeed can make an attractive difference in presentation, it significantly alters the musical balance of a recording. The bass lift is the most obvious, followed by a muddying of the bass and creating a generally, slightly congested, feel.

The brain uses 3D perception of sound to distinguish different parts in sound, e.g. different musical instruments playing simultaneously. I find crossfeed hurts this ability. This video exaggerates the effect somewhat, but the huge increase in intelligibility as it changes from mono to binaural shows how important spatial presentation is:

Thanks some great stuff there.
Nice song and performance and very obvious how flat and nondirectional mono is.
In a way the mono take is what crossfeed sounds like to me. Very upfront with very narrow soundstage width.
There is loads of stuff on Youtube with music from many genres in binaural that sound very convincing indeed.
These guys below,doing Simon and Garfunkel are not only good but there is a real surprise included!
If you listen to it rememenber to listen from the very beginning with your headphones ON!
Hearing music and natural sounds in REAL binaural makes the crossfeed on my HUGO sound like a synthetic gimmic in comparison!
Personally I am still listening to some of the BBC Proms 2017 concert streams in binaural.
Listening to those in lowly 320kbps is sometimes more realistic than the same works in plain stereo and hi res.
Binaural almost magically,uncovers and releases spatial information that is masked in plain stereo.It is a truly ear-opening experience imo. But crossfeed on the other hand, adds even more masking effects and to my ears deteriorates actual SQ more than plain stereo.I am still a bit puzzled Rob recommends it so strongly?
Binaural absolutely RULES imo. Two mics and two ears are all that is needed for realistic music reproduction via good headphones imho.
I am trying to push some classical music labels to record more in binaural but one answer I got from one person in the business was that it is still relatively new.
I informed him that it is in fact far from new.
Some of the very first recordings ever were actually binaural. We are talking late 19th century , not new .But it needs to be re-discovered by the recording companies.
I hope the BBC with their binaural Proms are leading the way and others will follow.
Cheers and thanks for the link Christer

"Sound Of Silence (3D Binaural Audio) - Simon and Garfunkel Cover - Jarvis Brothers (Ear to Ear)"

 

[Whazzzup]

Start a binaurel thread and hug it out

 

[Light - Man]

Christer, whatever you get up to out there, do be careful what you hug!

 

[EndGameSearch]

Thanks some great stuff there.
Nice song and performance and very obvious how flat and nondirectional mono is.
In a way the mono take is what crossfeed sounds like to me. Very upfront with very narrow soundstage width.
There is loads of stuff on Youtube with music from many genres in binaural that sound very convincing indeed.
These guys below,doing Simon and Garfunkel are not only good but there is a real surprise included!
If you listen to it rememenber to listen from the very beginning with your headphones ON!
Hearing music and natural sounds in REAL binaural makes the crossfeed on my HUGO sound like a synthetic gimmic in comparison!
Personally I am still listening to some of the BBC Proms 2017 concert streams in binaural.
Listening to those in lowly 320kbps is sometimes more realistic than the same works in plain stereo and hi res.
Binaural almost magically,uncovers and releases spatial information that is masked in plain stereo.It is a truly ear-opening experience imo. But crossfeed on the other hand, adds even more masking effects and to my ears deteriorates actual SQ more than plain stereo.I am still a bit puzzled Rob recommends it so strongly?
Binaural absolutely RULES imo. Two mics and two ears are all that is needed for realistic music reproduction via good headphones imho.
I am trying to push some classical music labels to record more in binaural but one answer I got from one person in the business was that it is still relatively new.
I informed him that it is in fact far from new.
Some of the very first recordings ever were actually binaural. We are talking late 19th century , not new .But it needs to be re-discovered by the recording companies.
I hope the BBC with their binaural Proms are leading the way and others will follow.
Cheers and thanks for the link Christer

"Sound Of Silence (3D Binaural Audio) - Simon and Garfunkel Cover - Jarvis Brothers (Ear to Ear)"

I'll bring it back to topic at the end of my post, but I will add that I think you're missing out limiting yourself to over the ear HP's. Especially with your travels. While ear geometry obviously plays a huge roll in shaping the sound, all of the spacial cues are in the recording themselves and I do not agree that we are dependent on our outer ear to reproduce those. Binaural recordings are a great example. They are actually recording the spacial cues the microphone receives after the sound reflects off a generically shaped silicone ear. Those are easily reproduced and can be accurately interpreted on $5 ear buds, or $XK full sized cans. On traditional recordings the focus is more on environment cues based on the rooms geometry. All of that detail is recorded and then we spend obscene amounts of money on gear to accurately reproduce the tiniest micro detail to build that accurate interpretation of the environment. While over the ears can aid in making a recording feel more life like, and ear geometry does come into play, it is still only interrupting sound coming from two set spots. It's not like ear phones are equivalent to a multi channel dolby set up where your ears need to interpret sound coming from actual different locations. We're really just listening to two speakers that are very close to our ear and the outer ear does not need to aid in placement. It does however add to the overall illusion of space and openness. When we spend money on expensive power cords and USB decrapifiers we're essentially trying to block all unintended background noise that would otherwise cover up those mirco details. That's why sound stage is always one of the first noticeable areas of improvement when we make these upgrades. I'll also add, that all though I love my HD800s, IEM's do provide an advantage. The fact that they isolate background noise so well allows those micro details to shine through and your inner ear is still reproducing the same spacial cues recorded in the music as over the ears.

I'll admit I was a sheep following Rob's advice regarding the cross filter. I bought my Hugo in July and never touched the cross filter after day one. Then after his comment I started playing with it. There are numerous high quality recordings where, for instance, I can hear a single cello playing out of both the left and right ear piece. Instead of hearing one cello in front of me, I could hear the same cello in both ears. Placement was some what in the center but I was aware of the sound coming from each ear. As soon as you engaged the first level of cross filter, the two merged into one and stepped in front of me. There are some recordings that need this more than others, but in general I've been leaving level one activated and am enjoying the results.

 

[Christer]

I'll bring it back to topic at the end of my post, but I will add that I think you're missing out limiting yourself to over the ear HP's. Especially with your travels. While ear geometry obviously plays a huge roll in shaping the sound, all of the spacial cues are in the recording themselves and I do not agree that we are dependent on our outer ear to reproduce those. Binaural recordings are a great example. They are actually recording the spacial cues the microphone receives after the sound reflects off a generically shaped silicone ear. Those are easily reproduced and can be accurately interpreted on $5 ear buds, or $XK full sized cans. On traditional recordings the focus is more on environment cues based on the rooms geometry. All of that detail is recorded and then we spend obscene amounts of money on gear to accurately reproduce the tiniest micro detail to build that accurate interpretation of the environment. While over the ears can aid in making a recording feel more life like, and ear geometry does come into play, it is still only interrupting sound coming from two set spots. It's not like ear phones are equivalent to a multi channel dolby set up where your ears need to interpret sound coming from actual different locations. We're really just listening to two speakers that are very close to our ear and the outer ear does not need to aid in placement. It does however add to the overall illusion of space and openness. When we spend money on expensive power cords and USB decrapifiers we're essentially trying to block all unintended background noise that would otherwise cover up those mirco details. That's why sound stage is always one of the first noticeable areas of improvement when we make these upgrades. I'll also add, that all though I love my HD800s, IEM's do provide an advantage. The fact that they isolate background noise so well allows those micro details to shine through and your inner ear is still reproducing the same spacial cues recorded in the music as over the ears.

I'll admit I was a sheep following Rob's advice regarding the cross filter. I bought my Hugo in July and never touched the cross filter after day one. Then after his comment I started playing with it. There are numerous high quality recordings where, for instance, I can hear a single cello playing out of both the left and right ear piece. Instead of hearing one cello in front of me, I could hear the same cello in both ears. Placement was some what in the center but I was aware of the sound coming from each ear. As soon as you engaged the first level of cross filter, the two merged into one and stepped in front of me. There are some recordings that need this more than others, but in general I've been leaving level one activated and am enjoying the results.

Hi,
I am not unfamiliar with the effect you mention it happens sometimes . But I don't consider recordings where it happens particularly well balanced.
And I will definitely audition the Audeze IEMs everybody is talking a lot about.
I have to admit that I am only really familiar with the crap IEMs on flights.
And on the few occasions I get to fly First Class they have always handed me a pair of noise cancelling over ear headphones.
Regarding my own HD 800 I have to admit I haven't used them for months. My HEKV2 are soo much better that I even wonder how the HD800 could be my reference headphone for so long.Basically everything to do with microdetail and timbre and such takes clear step closer to the real thing with the HEKV2.
But I am always willing to learn and my comments regarding crossfeed entirely rests on what I hear via my HUGO 1.
Contrary to what Rob just said he heard via HUGO 1, I do hear more front depth with many recordings with crossfeed engaged.It can be very obvious with level three set.
Even on a relatively low res stream like 3D binaural mix on the Vienna Philharmonic's Mahler's 6th from the Proms, tympani and some other percussive instruments moved a clear very audible step in the sense of deeper into and more away and in front of me than without crossfeed.
But at the expense of narrower width and not as clear an image as without.
PS. I can't remember if you do.But if you use a USB decrapifier with your HUGO 2 what are you using?
I am hopefully only a couple of weeks from my first audition of HUGO 2.
Mini DAVE or not? That is the question.
Cheers Christer

 

[EndGameSearch]

Hello,
I will definitely audition the Audeze IEMs everybody is talking a lot about.
I have to admit that I am only really familiar with the crap IEMs on flights.
And on the few occasions I get to fly First Class they have always handed me a pair of noise cancelling over ear headphones.
But I am always willing to learn and my comments regarding crossfeed entirely rests on what I hear via my HUGO.
Cheers Christer

The LCDi4's are hands down the best investment I've made in this hobby for my needs. They are more related to over the ears HP's than IEM, but there are some amazing multi driver IEM's that will blow you away too. Having as many as 18 drivers reproducing those tiny micro details just millimeters from your ear drum is a pretty amazing thing.

 

[Ike1985]

The LCDi4's are hands down the best investment I've made in this hobby for my needs. They are more related to over the ears HP's than IEM, but there are some amazing multi driver IEM's that will blow you away too. Having as many as 18 drivers reproducing those tiny micro details just millimeters from your ear drum is a pretty amazing thing.

You must be referring to A18, mine are absolutely stunning monitors with a very exciting, dynamic and alive sound.

 

[EndGameSearch]

You must be referring to A18, mine are absolutely stunning monitors with a very exciting, dynamic and alive sound.

U18... Universal works well for me.

 

[Light - Man]

Those mainly using IEM's may be interested in this video, which suggests that they are not good for your long term hearing.