[speedracer1]

Originally Posted by speedracer1 

Hugo vs. Hugo 2 sound differences...

At the CanJam show in NYC on Sunday morning I had the opportunity to listen to both the Hugo and Hugo 2.  Specifically I had my own source equipment including:

1) Hugo
2) Shure KSE-1500
3) A Red Wine modified AK 380 player
4) Optical cable
5) My very own choice of music that I'm very familiar with and
6) Custom Snugs for the KSE-1500 that fit perfectly and isolate background noise very well as the show is no place for serious listening...

Here is my listening impressions/takeaways.  

Being a Chord Hugo owner myself for over 2.5 years in my view the Hugo is amazing portable device but compared to other non-portable equipment it can be "thin sounding and mid-forward.  The Hugo 2.clearly improves in these areas!  The musically of the Hugo 2 is improved in every way over the Hugo. The Hugo 2 is the closest portable device to Dave you could have. Case and construction are excellent as the Hugo 2 is slightly thinner and slightly smaller then Hugo.  Thank you Mr. Franks for building in a plastic shade/window to protect the optical port that replaces that port protector for the original Hugo that was frankly a pain in the As*.  The usability has improved (more intuitive) and weight is about the same.  Overall a solid improvement in engineering for second generation equipment.  

Short and sweet!
Sincerely your friend in audio
-Speed...   
 
Quote:

   
Thank you for the feedback - you are the first person to mention the optical port, so were clearly paying attention to details.
 
I imagine that many readers will be interested if you are able to flesh out your comment 'The musically of the Hugo 2 is improved in every way over the Hugo.' 

 
In order to properly flesh out and answer your question, I need to provide some musical definitions so we have a common ground to work from.  My background among other things is I am a musician and an audiophile and I work directly with master studio recording engineers and musicians for both live and recorded sound. 
 
 
Definitions:
 
1) “Tone” refers to the balance of frequencies present in a sound.
2) “Timbre” refers to the characteristic sound of an instrument.  Timbre is everything that lets you distinguish one instrument from another.  For example a trumpet has a bash timbre compared with the smoother timbre of a saxophone.
3) “Attack” is the method or clearness of the beginning of an instrument phases
4) “Decay” is how quickly the sound drops to the sustain level after the initial peak
5) “Sustain” is the constant volume that the sound takes after decay
6) “Release” how quickly the sound fades after key release
7) “Sound Stage” One of jobs of the audio engineer is the effort to re-create the visual image of a group or a musical performance.  Specifically the venue, location of the listener in relation to the performance, instrument location and instrumentation separation.
 
I'm quoting myself here but your question is around "the Hugo can be "thin sounding and mid-forward.  The Hugo 2 clearly improves in these areas!  The musically of the Hugo 2 is improved in every way over the Hugo"
 
Specifically thin-sounding and musically I'm referring to tone, timbre, attack and delay across the frequency spectrum from bottom to top. I did notice an improvement in sound stage as well.  I would have preferred to bring my full size cans in but I figured it would not be an effective use of time.  The KSE-1500 with the snugs served me well for this quick evaluation. 
 
Sincerely your friend in audio,
-Speed 

 

[speedracer1]

What u think about RWAK380 combo vs hugo2??

The combo between the Hugo 2 and the RWAK380 player is better then with the Hugo.  For portability reasons I use the RWAK 380 + RWAK 380 amp to/from the train and then I can choose to switch to the Hugo or the Hugo 2 (soon) when listening in the office.   
 
Sincerely your friend in audio,
- Speed

 

[Mojo ideas]

i hear you. i'm still awaiting for a hugo2 to be in dragonfly or cipher cable size...but that may be some yrs away.

or do what many of us do: buy it (new or used), smile and enjoy the cutting edge sound,
and then when a new version comes out, sell what you have.

Five years or so without a chord is along time to wait

 

[maxh22]

When I got into headphones after my Speaker setup was done I checked user reviews and everyone applaud Lyr2 and Valhalla 2. I tried both and low quality both amps. I still don't get why people like Schiit gear. They sound low quality to me.

 
I wouldn't say the Lyr 2 and Valhalla 2 are low quality amps (I've owned the Valhalla) It would be better to say that these two amps are good value tube amps in their price range. They are not the best in the world, but for the money they are good. The stock tubes in the Valhalla are neutral with just a hint of tube warmth that some people may like. Others may like to add warmer sounding tubes to tailer the sound to their tastes. 
 
Schiit markets their products to a wider audience than Chord. They have products that range from $99 to $2,300. Not everyone can afford a $600 dac/amp as their first premium audio component, you have to start somewhere. I feel that Schiit is a good place to start for those with a limited budget who want a good sounding VALUE solution. 
 
They have a great philosophy in the way they do their business and cut out dealers in order to sell the product to the consumer at the lowest price they possibly can.
 
Chord operates differently and that's okay. They also make fantastic products but namely target the audience who want a 'Premium audio experience' .
 
Schiit makes very good sounding gear. At Canjam I was listening to their Vali 2 and Modi MB combo with Mr.Speakers Aeon and was very impressed with the sound and synergy. It sounded different from the Chord house sound but still very musical and enjoyable. I thought the Ragnarok and Yggdrasil combo was also great but I was more impressed with Chord's Dave. (The schiit booth didn't have Tidal so I couldn't play songs I knew but they still had a decent selection of songs to sample.)
 
I personally feel that although Schiit's MB does sound very good it has quite a few limitations. One of which requires the unit to breakin first, and then be left on for several days to several weeks (depending on the dac in question) to reach thermal equalibrium and sound its best. None of the Chord dacs have this limitation. 
 
I could turn Mojo on and within 10 minutes it will sound its best. Same for Hugo, and according to some reviews I read online, same for Dave. 

 

[canali]

Five years or so without a chord is along time to wait

agree...hence buy it (whatever chord product) now at the best price you can and enjoy it ..
the technology is what it is.
 
i have a mojo now...even using it more with the extender kit/ipod touch 6 brick for walking around
...not too bad...still will swap it out with the dragonfly red for lightweight on the go.
nice to have options.

 

[glockenspiel69]

  The combo between the Hugo 2 and the RWAK380 player is better then with the Hugo.  For portability reasons I use the RWAK 380 + RWAK 380 amp to/from the train and then I can choose to switch to the Hugo or the Hugo 2 (soon) when listening in the office.   
 
Sincerely your friend in audio,
- Speed

 
And RWAK 380 vs Hugo 2 as DAC (resolution, tranparency,..)?

 

[Peter Hyatt]

Tap length is 18000 in Gungnir MB and Yggy,
9000 in Bifrost MB. Stopband rejection is 120dB+, IIRC.

49,000 plus in Hugo 2

 

[Peter Hyatt]

I wish we weren't so over sensitive.  Searchsub is comparing one dac brand to another dac brand (Hugo in regards to the thread)  and shared  his experience dealing with schiit fans.
 I like schiit and I am not highly offended.    I want to compare Hugo 2 to Yggi.  

 

[canali]

 
I wish we weren't so over sensitive.  Searchsub is comparing one dac brand to another dac brand (Hugo in regards to the thread)  and shared  his experience dealing with schiit fans.
 I like schiit and I am not highly offended.    I want to compare Hugo 2 to Yggi.  

when the hugo 2 comes out a DAC slamdown (in the $2-3k range) would be fun:

Chord Hugo 2
Schiit Yiggy
Sim 280D
http://www.simaudio.com/en/product/63-streaming-dsd-dac.html
...others?

a friend of mine feels that most DACS,
within the same price range (give or take $500)
dont' have that huge a difference in SQ.
don't know how valid that is.

guess we'll find out.

 

[dezispop]

Sound-wise? Resolution and tone?

Any difference between RWAK380 combo and rwak380 + Hugo 2?

The combo between the Hugo 2 and the RWAK380 player is better then with the Hugo.  For portability reasons I use the RWAK 380 + RWAK 380 amp to/from the train and then I can choose to switch to the Hugo or the Hugo 2 (soon) when listening in the office.   

Sincerely your friend in audio,
- Speed

 

[jlbrach]

Sound-wise? Resolution and tone?

Any difference between RWAK380 combo and rwak380 + Hugo 2?

if you are going to use an astell kern DAP as a transport for the Hugo I suggest you do what I do,use an AK100 which has 2 card slots and will hold more music than the AK380

 

[tunes]

Does the Ak100 have USB out for the Hugo 2 or only digital out. I have a QP1R with 2 card slots to use up to 200 gb each and can use it as a transport for the Hugo 2 bit but t only has digital out and from what I have read, SQ is better with USB than Toslink digital output???

 

[bmichels]

if you are going to use an astell kern DAP as a transport for the Hugo I suggest you do what I do,use an AK100 which has 2 card slots and will hold more music than the AK380

This is correct and exactly what I use. But... a friend who owe Ak100, AK240 and Ak380 told me that the digital out of the AK380 ( into HUGO) sound better than with the AK100 and AK240. So....there Is no PERFECT solution !

 

[zachawry]

This is correct and exactly what I use. But... a friend who owe Ak100, AK240 and Ak380 told me that the digital out of the AK380 ( into HUGO) sound better than with the AK100 and AK240. So....there Is no PERFECT solution !

Does the AK100 have an optical out? Optical input into the Hugo is very good. 
 
I use an AK120II optical out to my Hugo, and it's great. 
 
I don't know how much money is sitting there doing nothing in your bank account, but buying an AK380 just to be a glorified hard drive for your Hugo is quite the waste of money. 

 

[miketlse]

   
In order to properly flesh out and answer your question, I need to provide some musical definitions so we have a common ground to work from.  My background among other things is I am a musician and an audiophile and I work directly with master studio recording engineers and musicians for both live and recorded sound. 
 
 
Definitions:
 
1) “Tone” refers to the balance of frequencies present in a sound.
2) “Timbre” refers to the characteristic sound of an instrument.  Timbre is everything that lets you distinguish one instrument from another.  For example a trumpet has a bash timbre compared with the smoother timbre of a saxophone.
3) “Attack” is the method or clearness of the beginning of an instrument phases
4) “Decay” is how quickly the sound drops to the sustain level after the initial peak
5) “Sustain” is the constant volume that the sound takes after decay
6) “Release” how quickly the sound fades after key release
7) “Sound Stage” One of jobs of the audio engineer is the effort to re-create the visual image of a group or a musical performance.  Specifically the venue, location of the listener in relation to the performance, instrument location and instrumentation separation.
 
I'm quoting myself here but your question is around "the Hugo can be "thin sounding and mid-forward.  The Hugo 2 clearly improves in these areas!  The musically of the Hugo 2 is improved in every way over the Hugo"
 
Specifically thin-sounding and musically I'm referring to tone, timbre, attack and delay across the frequency spectrum from bottom to top. I did notice an improvement in sound stage as well.  I would have preferred to bring my full size cans in but I figured it would not be an effective use of time.  The KSE-1500 with the snugs served me well for this quick evaluation. 
 
Sincerely your friend in audio,
-Speed 

 
Thanks for expanding on your feedback.
The list of definitions will be useful for many of the readers.
This will help avoid the normal audiophile scenario 'ie ask 10 audiophiles to define timbre, and you will get 15 different answers, and the reader is left more confused than before', etc.