[wakka992]

Hi Rob,
thanks for the detailed explanation you gave to @Em2016, we all learn a thing of two by reading your post! Can you please tell me if I'm right in saying that (in bold you can find my thoughts):
- with TOSLink and Coax you have implemented DPLL (digital phase lock loop), so no matter what clock this asynchronous input have, because they will be reclocked internally by DPLL. You've also determined that "DPLL was indeed perfect sonically";
- before Hugo 2, USB sounded brighter not because it had better transparency, but because of more RF noise --> hence your choice in adding more ferrites to Hugo2 USB input;
- now using Hugo 2 "with HP listening I could hear no difference at all between the USB and optical inputs" --> RF noise gap has been closed by adding more ferrites;
- since "USB does have the benefit of being locked to the FPGA clock" = the path is shorter --> even if they sound the same, USB is to be preferred to Optical (not to mention the increased PCM support).

Thanks for your input!

Hi Rob,
regarding my previous question, can I kindly ask you if you had the chance to consider it?
Thanks

 

[musicday]

Hi
I've got Chord Hugo2 and can Hugo2 drive these speakers Omega 3i because some other Hugo 2 users have used Omega speakers direct from Hugo 2?

link: https://omegaloudspeakers.com/collections/monitor-speakers/products/super-3i?variant=32116925196

Hugo 2 will drive the Omega speakers but for best results get a speaker around 98dB@8 ohm, and if you choose careful you will eliminate the need to buy separate subwoofer.

 

[dmance]

Hugo 2 will drive the Omega speakers but for best results get a speaker around 98dB@8 ohm, and if you choose careful you will eliminate the need to buy separate subwoofer.

I went Hugo2 direct to DIY Voxativ AF2.6 speakers and it sounded fantastically real ...but IMO not as pleasant as thru my ZOTL40 amp.
You can tell me it was the increased transparency I was unused to. Perhaps so, but I also wear sunglasses on sunny days and a hoodie in the rain.
I believe it's the interplay of electronics and the complex impedance of the speakers with the Hugo2 amp.
IMO ...try it both ways.

 

[qafro]

@dmance So are you saying that Chord Hugo 2 directed to your speakers sounded better than via ZOTL40 amp ?

I went Hugo2 direct to DIY Voxativ AF2.6 speakers and it sounded fantastically real ...but IMO not as pleasant as thru my ZOTL40 amp.
You can tell me it was the increased transparency I was unused to. Perhaps so, but I also wear sunglasses on sunny days and a hoodie in the rain.
I believe it's the interplay of electronics and the complex impedance of the speakers with the Hugo2 amp.
IMO ...try it both ways.

 

[dmance]

@dmance So are you saying that Chord Hugo 2 directed to your speakers sounded better than via ZOTL40 amp ?

I had the speakers for 3 months - various DACs through my ZOTL40's - so I knew the sound signature. I listened to Hugo2 direct for about 4 hours and recall yelling out 'What' several times. Just incredible transparency - so just for that its worth experiencing it. However, for whatever reason, i preferred the sound with the ZOTL40. I would say the Hugo2 direct was thin sounding and lows did not bite nor hit as hard as with my amp. Now - as with all things in this pursuit - it could be several issues in my chain ...so I never rush to judgement. i'm trying hard to adopt Rob Watts recommendation to wean myself off false euphonics and distortion that sound 'better' but is not really how live music sounds like.
I never had the volume up past halfway so it was not amp clipping. I used the adapters (attached) with my speaker wire - and this probably caused some distortion ...maybe? Would the 2watts of Dave sound better? Would a subwoofer tapped off the headphone outputs help improve the lows? These are things i never tried.

 

[ValeryPaul]

Anyone has the combo Hugo 2 + Focal Clear? If so, how do you like it?

 

[doraymon]

Anyone has the combo Hugo 2 + Focal Clear? If so, how do you like it?

Yeah, here!
Fantastic tango my friend

 

[JaZZ]

I had the speakers for 3 months - various DACs through my ZOTL40's - so I knew the sound signature. I listened to Hugo2 direct for about 4 hours and recall yelling out 'What' several times. Just incredible transparency - so just for that its worth experiencing it. However, for whatever reason, i preferred the sound with the ZOTL40. I would say the Hugo2 direct was thin sounding and lows did not bite nor hit as hard as with my amp. Now - as with all things in this pursuit - it could be several issues in my chain ...so I never rush to judgement. i'm trying hard to adopt Rob Watts recommendation to wean myself off false euphonics and distortion that sound 'better' but is not really how live music sounds like.
I never had the volume up past halfway so it was not amp clipping. I used the adapters (attached) with my speaker wire - and this probably caused some distortion ...maybe? Would the 2watts of Dave sound better? Would a subwoofer tapped off the headphone outputs help improve the lows? These are things i never tried.

It's important to keep in mind that no system is really neutral and flat sounding, the less so one with fullrange speakers. I would indeed expect an additional amp to warm up the sound enough to make the lack of low bass and/or a general underrepresentation of lower frequencies (to be expected from such a speaker design) less apparent and annoying, apart from the general forgivingness from the amp's euphonic colorations. So I highly recommend to equalize the over-all amplitude response (maybe best by ears) in favour of low and lowest frequencies instead of renouncing the transparency from the direct drive. I think if I were in your shoes I would use a subwoofer to take some pressure from the Hugo₂'s output stage at low frequencies, where most of the power is required, the more so with equalizing.

 

[Rob Watts]

Hi Rob,
thanks for the detailed explanation you gave to @Em2016, we all learn a thing of two by reading your post! Can you please tell me if I'm right in saying that (in bold you can find my thoughts):
- with TOSLink and Coax you have implemented DPLL (digital phase lock loop), so no matter what clock this asynchronous input have, because they will be reclocked internally by DPLL. You've also determined that "DPLL was indeed perfect sonically";
- before Hugo 2, USB sounded brighter not because it had better transparency, but because of more RF noise --> hence your choice in adding more ferrites to Hugo2 USB input;
- now using Hugo 2 "with HP listening I could hear no difference at all between the USB and optical inputs" --> RF noise gap has been closed by adding more ferrites;
- since "USB does have the benefit of being locked to the FPGA clock" = the path is shorter --> even if they sound the same, USB is to be preferred to Optical (not to mention the increased PCM support).

Thanks for your input!

Hmm - it all depends upon how much RF noise the source creates; so a low noise source (mobile, lap-top) then USB = Optical. But a high noise source then optical is preferred.

So try for yourself; if it's a quality source then it will not make a great deal of difference. But sure, if they sound the same then USB is preferable as it covers all possible files.

 

[dmance]

... I think if I were in your shoes I would use a subwoofer to take some pressure from the Hugo₂'s output stage at low frequencies, where most of the power is required, the more so with equalizing.

JaZZ, thanks, I agree.
I trust that @Rob Watts will test his rumored DX digital amps against many speakers to ensure they maintain transparency across all driver impedance-vs-frequency complexities.
Myself, I hope, toward the middle of February, to get my hands on a DAVE and for testing, a pair of Paradigm Persona 9H hybrid speakers. These are 96dB efficient and, below 200Hz, utilize internal amplifiers to drive the woofers. So they are the best of both worlds: pure DAVE 2 Watts of transparency for the mids and highs ...and zero stress on DAVE's amps to supply low end power. Could be end-game ...staggering fidelity ...good SPL ...a fraction of the expected costs.

 

[514077]

I had the speakers for 3 months - various DACs through my ZOTL40's - so I knew the sound signature. I listened to Hugo2 direct for about 4 hours and recall yelling out 'What' several times. Just incredible transparency - so just for that its worth experiencing it. However, for whatever reason, i preferred the sound with the ZOTL40. I would say the Hugo2 direct was thin sounding and lows did not bite nor hit as hard as with my amp. Now - as with all things in this pursuit - it could be several issues in my chain ...so I never rush to judgement. i'm trying hard to adopt Rob Watts recommendation to wean myself off false euphonics and distortion that sound 'better' but is not really how live music sounds like.
I never had the volume up past halfway so it was not amp clipping. I used the adapters (attached) with my speaker wire - and this probably caused some distortion ...maybe? Would the 2watts of Dave sound better? Would a subwoofer tapped off the headphone outputs help improve the lows? These are things i never tried.

Maybe, you should've yelled out "WTA!"

 

[ray-dude]

JaZZ, thanks, I agree.
I trust that @Rob Watts will test his rumored DX digital amps against many speakers to ensure they maintain transparency across all driver impedance-vs-frequency complexities.
Myself, I hope, toward the middle of February, to get my hands on a DAVE and for testing, a pair of Paradigm Persona 9H hybrid speakers. These are 96dB efficient and, below 200Hz, utilize internal amplifiers to drive the woofers. So they are the best of both worlds: pure DAVE 2 Watts of transparency for the mids and highs ...and zero stress on DAVE's amps to supply low end power. Could be end-game ...staggering fidelity ...good SPL ...a fraction of the expected costs.

Looking forward to hearing your impressions about a cross over to amplification at 200Hz (naively, it seems like there would be a lot of spatial information still at that frequency...play a track with a digital low pass filter at 200Hz, and you're hearing quite a lot of vocals and other info).

Next week I'm going to audition some Voxativ's with my BluDAVE, with a crossover from active sub to high efficiency driver (100+db) that has a cross over that is configurable up to 120Hz. I'll be paying very close attention to how the cross over impacts perceived transparency and soundstage and see how low I can push the cross over. I'll share what I find.

 

[Hooster]

Hi
I've got Chord Hugo2 and can Hugo2 drive these speakers Omega 3i because some other Hugo 2 users have used Omega speakers direct from Hugo 2?

link: https://omegaloudspeakers.com/collections/monitor-speakers/products/super-3i?variant=32116925196

The Hugo2 will indeed drive the speakers. The question is, will it suite the kind of music you listen to, your room and the level you like to listen at? If you for example are listening to hard rock in a large room, forget it. If you on the other hand have a small room and listen to simple music at low levels, then the Hugo2 will probably do just fine.

My advice is not to try to cut corners. Firstly, get speakers because you like the way they sound, not because they may perhaps work with a Hugo2. Secondly if you need and amplifier to drive the speakers, get one. Essentially, don´t waste the talents of Hugo2 by cutting corners elsewhere.

 

[ChisChas]

Any suggestions on how to best keep it cool and reduce the amount of auto shut-offs? Thanks for an amazing product and happy

I posted about 3 weeks ago suggesting polymer anti-vibration cones which I use now. My Hugo 2 runs cooler and resists tugs from the headphone cable. Inexpensive improvement and there aren't many of them in hi-fi

 

[vrln]

IMPORTANT: Read my update note at the end of this post. This fatigue/brain burn in phenomenon should NOT happen, so please discard my mentions of that. Needless to say, I´m now even happier with this DAC/headphone amp.

I had a loaner Hugo 2 here last weekend and yesterday decided to buy one. First some background info: used to own a Mojo, but found that while it was a good portable device, it left me disappointed as a desktop device. The USB input in particular was noisy/glitchy and the SQ took a big dive compared to when driven from mobile battery powered gear. It also eventually broke down (it was in desktop use so connected all the time) and had to be replaced by warranty (no problems there). Also briefly auditioned the Hugo 1 once and actually preferred the Mojo with most headphones. As for the DAVE, that was a completely different experience. Tested it briefly too with the HD 800 S and I have to admit that my first impression was simply that it´s the best source I´ve ever heard. Can´t lie, way different league than the Mojo/Hugo 1 - extremely real sounding with zero harshness. Depth I didn´t even know headphones could pull off. The price is obviously another question though... Not for me, but I´m looking forward to seeing more of its technology trickle down to cheaper Chord products.

First some non-SQ related impressions:

- Much better placement of inputs and buttons, actually desktop friendly this time
- Volume scrolling button works so much nicer than the volume up and down buttons on Mojo
- The text markings on the inputs are a good improvement too
- Remote works great and really helps with the sometimes obscure orb interface
- Full size headphone jack and a 3.5 mm one are a nice combination
- No hiss on my Sennheiser IE 800 S even on loud gain, something very few headphone amps can pull off
- The new desktop mode after 24 hours of being connected to a charger is a great addition (I´ll be running mine with this)
- Chord´s Windows 10 drivers don´t work on the current Windows 10 Insider Preview version (using exclusive mode results in a kernel crash)
- The Creators Update driver version does not work with this version of Windows either; makes the entire device disappear (so can´t be used at all), so I have to use the standard Windows 10 one and stick to ASIO/windows shared audio for now
- The dim button on the remote is useful
- Very small, disappears on your desktop (huge improvement in ergonomics if you have little interest in traditional large separates like me). These days I usually want my electronics to be single unit. This is obviously 100% subjective.
- Runs quite warm, but not as hot as Mojo (and after desktop mode is engaged it seems to cool down a bit)
- I´d consider this a desktop DAC that´s easy to move around if needed, but not a portable
- I kinda like the trademark Chord design, but would prefer a more standard look/chassis if it was cheaper (however I understand why this isn´t done; the look gives Chord products a unique look which is very important for marketing etc.)
- Personally I see Chord as somewhat similar to Apple: they have high margins because they can pull it off. Most companies wish they could, but can´t. They don´t have anything that makes it possible. With Apple it´s IOS and the hardware design that allows them to keep margins way above their competitors - with Chord it´s their unique FPGA based technology. Would Chord make more money if they expanded and lowered prices? From a bill of materials perspective I think they could absolutely drop if they wanted to, but I´m not so sure it would be a good idea from a business perspective. It could also be that mass market is simply not something they are interested in. They have a solid spot in high end audio and are likely happy there.
- Build quality on this unit is flawless (I´ve seen some pictures online where the orb lights can be seen through the two piece construction cracks; no such issues here).
- I wish Chord didn´t use microUSB connectors. They are really fragile. Hoping to see USB type C in the next one. Full size coaxial would be nice to have too.

Let´s move over to sound quality next:

All comparisons are against my Sennheiser HDV 820 (that I later traded in and no longer have). Headphones used are mostly the Sennheiser HD 800 S.

In the beginning something sounded "off", as if my brain had issues adjusting to the sound. It wasn´t a traditional "digital glare", but more like something just made me feel uncomfortable and slightly fatigued. This disappeared entirely after 3-4 hours of listening and then I could no longer find it anymore. Note that this did not happen with DAVE. Odd. There was no adjustment needed for DAVE´s sound. The next day it was there again, but it went away much faster (in 15 minutes or so). Now on day 4 I don´t get it anymore. I´m not much of a believer in mechanical burn in, but brain adjustment to a new sound signature is definitely real and I think this is what happened here.

- No SQ issues/glitches with USB (very important improvement)
- The sound is fast, hyper detailed and has an ethereal vibe to it. You hear new stuff in a lot of songs. As for dynamics the microdynamics are fantastic, but macrodynamics are somewhat lacking. I´ve never heard a battery powered DAC/amp that has good macrodynamics and while this is better at that than other battery powered gear I´ve heard, it´s still not as good as what good mains powered heavy desktop gear can pull off. DAVE for example has a lot more scale and authority to its sound.
- Soundstage isn´t bad, but it´s not the widest out there (loses against Sennheiser HDV 820 in balanced mode)
- If I´m stressed or tired I´ll gravitate towards the warm filters (or listening to very compressed low dynamic range music), but in usually the green or white filter sound the best to me
- It´s not a portable DAVE, but it´s not a Mojo or Hugo 1 either. Maybe in three years we´ll see a Hugo approach the current DAVE as the Xilinx FPGA tech goes from the current 28 nm in Hugo 2 to something like 10 nm (the latest Apple SOC is already using this) or 16 nm (already quite mainstream).
- This has the best instrument/vocals separation I´ve ever heard outside of DAVE
- Extremely good for lowish volume listening (which is what I usually do), you don´t need to raise the volume that much to make the sound come alive (vs. in my experience most mellow sounding gear requires fairly high listening volumes to start sounding good)
- It will ruthlessly show if a record has a higher than usual noise floor and/or clicks in the treble. Think of this like the film grain filters used in Netflix Marvel shows: it looks good on LCD screens with slower pixel shift, but on fast OLED the effect doesn´t suit them at all. This is very apparent in songs that use these kinds of effects purposely for artistic reasons.
- It´s more revealing of lossy music than the HDV 820. Spotify 320 kbs is no problem with HDV 820, but no thank you on the Hugo 2 on green/white filters at least. The warm filters make it annoying, but it´s still more picky than HDV 820.
- As expected great with IEMs (tried with Sennheiser IE 800 S and HIFIMAN RE-600), HDV 820 can´t compete here at all (not a surprise considering its high output impedance and high power/optimized for high ohm headphones)
- The upside to the high resolution is that If you are listening to extremely expensively/well produced material these will show off that work in all its glory. Example: Michael Jackson´s Invincible sounds really good with this and I previously never liked the album (felt overproduced).
- Crossfeed is a great addition and works surprisingly well with the HD 800 S (never used crossfeed in the past, but now I can definitely see myself using it every now and then). Maybe we could have EQ/tone controls in the next Hugo or in the 2 Go via the mobile app?

If you´re interested in the Hugo 2, I´d suggest an extended audition or preferably ask for a loaner for several days. Should be fairly easy considering how popular they are / how many dealers sell Chord gear. Give it some time and don´t make any decisions on the first day of listening. I was ready to pack it up and not listen to it anymore after the first two hours (really glad I didn´t do that!) Don´t buy it blind as it sounds different enough to most gear that you need to hear if it´s for you or not. Or to be more precise you need to check if your brain adjusts to the new sound (with more information than before?) If you´re looking for a warm and euphonic sound to everything this isn´t it. Instead the sound is pure, full of light (but not bright), supremely fast and detailed. It´s solid state done right if you ask me. Some records will sound bright, some dark, some downright horrible and some stunning (as it should be).

Also here are the results of a test I always try to do with all new gear - switch back to your familiar setup (HDV 820 & HD 800 S) and see what you´re missing (if anything)...

- No adjustment period whatsoever with HDV 820 (doesn´t sound "off" in any way)
- Hugo 2 has better microdynamics, but worse macrodynamics (lacks scale/authority in comparison)
- Resolution and instrument separation are a lot better on the Hugo 2
- HD 800 S has better tonality/synergy (more focus on midrange, less emphasis on treble) on HDV 820, you can see it´s been voiced for for this headphone series in particular. I´m pretty sure Hugo 2 is more accurate at showing how the headphone sounds like without "tuning" though.
- HDV 820 is smoother, more liquid and highlights clicks/pops/mistakes less (the result of lower resolution/smeared transients?)
- Spotify sounds good again
- Grabs my attention less, more for easy listening (not necessarily a bad thing, depends)
- High volume level listening fatigues me less on HDV 820

All in all HDV 820 vs. Hugo 2 is mostly a question what what you value the most. Which one wins depends on your sound preferences. However if you want to use more headphones than just high ohm dynamics then Hugo 2 is clearly the much more versatile choice. Me? I´m looking forward to adding the Focal Clears to my collection and want to use IEMs on my desktop setup too so moving to the Chord camp was a pretty easy choice in the end. Plus to be honest in the long term there´s little chance I´ll be keeping the HD 800 S after the HD 820 are out (I´m still pretty sure their tonality will be more to my liking plus the closed design is a plus for my use; next to a sometimes noisy PC).

IMPORTANT UPDATE: it seems my gaming PC (mains power) suffers from noisy power. While the Mojo resulted in audible hum/clicks and these are resolved with the Hugo 2, I have recently found that the weird "off" sound I described in these impressions is caused by this issue. I tried optical output from my second PC and this phenomenon is gone. Sound is more relaxed with less fatigue and this is with a standard motherboard SPDIF optical out (so high jitter). This also means Hugo 2 is really good at dealing with high jitter sources.