[estreeter]

I am unclear the purpose of this post outside of outright advertising. This is not a new dac and is actually quite old. Original post basically just cut and pasted info from chord's website and makes me wonder if OP is connected to Chord in some way (dealer?).

As FYI, I have a chord hugo. I would highly recommend any potential buyers of this dac, think twice about it. Chord designer rob watt has publicly said that he is working in desktop version on new FPGA. So if you buy this old product, you will probably have it made obsolete in near future.

 
Give it a rest, champ - with the possible exception of the Berkeley Reference, most DACs are rapidly obsoleted by the sheer volume of new product coming out of the chute. The Hugo had to contend with almost immediate comparison the PS Audio FPGA DAC, despite a huge price differential - that's the way of the world. I dont know about any of the other Hugo owners out there, but I didnt buy mine on the expectation that it would rule over anyone's DAC hierarchy - I bought it was a 'Swiss Army knife', and that's a level of functionality that I doubt the next desktop DAC from Chord will retain. Purrin is probably the most outspoken of the Hugo's critics, but how many of the DACs on his list of recommendations is even remotely 'portable' or capable of wirelessly streaming from a portable player ? Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater - folk can either assess the Hugo on it's merits or they can vote with their wallets : either way, trying to keep up with the Joneses is futile and hideously expensive. 

 

[bmichels]

   
with the possible exception of the Berkeley Reference, most DACs are rapidly obsoleted ....

 
Why the Berkeley Reference would not also rapidly be obsoleted ? what is so different with it ?

   
 
In fact we could even say that without any USB & DSD support, and with 24/192 as maximum supported bit rate, it is ...already obsolete 

  (kidding)

 

[shaizada]

Ummm, just heard the Hugo against the QBD76HDSD.  Not even a close comparison.  Just more of everything there with the QBD76HDSD.  Clearly, the Hugo is set as a portable class leader and an excellent main DAC if needed.  
 
However, the QBD76HDSD is just a better home system DAC in very sonic parameter.  Bigger, clearer more articulate bass performance, fuller, denser midrange and a better resolving top end.  I can't see anyone comparing the two as the Hugo just gets outclassed by the QBD76HDSD.
 
It is clear to me the upgraded FPGA in the Hugo is not the only thing that is responsible for higher sound quality.  Very soon the replacement for the QBD76HDSD will be coming out and again at a very high price.  Sure to outdo both the dacs mentioned above but clearly not as a competitor to the Hugo which is fantastic for the market it is aimed it.
 
I know we innately want a lesser costing product to slay a giant...we all want that.  But two products from the same manufacturer built for different purposes and different price points is a silly case to argue.

 

[isquirrel]

The Chord QBD 76 and the DSX1000 have exactly the same internal DAC chip, the Hugo's FPGA chip is Chord latest design and for now their best DAC. Look at the difference in the Dynamic Range  +140dB for the Hugo.
 
I did a comparison of the DSX1000 and the Hugo in the Hugo thread, they were both tested in a decent headphone setup as well as a very good 2 channel setup, with Wilson Alexia's 
 
No contest in a blind test (the listening panel had 3 current QBD76 HDSD owners plus myself) the Hugo was the best sounding DAC. The dealer reports he is in fact selling the Hugo to current owners of the QBD76 and DSX1000 for use in their systems. He has substantial confirmed orders for the new QBD76 when it is released.
 
Not wanting to say that Rudi is incorrect as there may have been some other system synergy going, but for me yes they were close and shared a similar 'house' sound signature, however the Hugo was preferred. It was quite amusing when it was revealed that it had been the top choice.

 

[shaizada]

I am pretty sure the single ended outputs were used in the test above for both dacs (I could be wrong).  The Chord Hugo is RCA single ended output only. 
In a fully balanced system using the Chord QBD76HDSD Balanced Outputs, the Chord Hugo was simply lesser sounding.
 
Anyhow, this JUST shows how important system synergy and implementation is.  One can't simply drop in a component and do an AB test unless everything is exactly the same.  
 
I don't know what the rest of the test system is above. The Alexia's are no where near as resolving as ceramic drivers and a diamond tweeter executed properly. I am intimately familiar with the whole Wilson range top (XLF) to bottom (Duets). However, we all do hear differently.  I would urge anyone considering the dacs to simply test BOTH dacs in their own familiar system and then decide.
 
I heard, we heard, they heard helps, but....simply doesn't cut it.  HAVE to hear a component in your own system and only THEN YOU know

 

[isquirrel]

Correct the Single ended fixed outputs were used. I agree the only valid test is what a component sounds like in your own system.
 
Not going to get into the speakers debate here as this is Head-Fi after all.
 
What this all says is that Chord are going to have a very exciting DAC to listen to in the near future. 

 

[DarKu]

Chord is currently working on a QBD76 successor based on Hugo tech, it will be released next year.
That one is a DAC to listen to.
I've had QBD76 in my home multiple times and it is really among the best DAC's I have listened to, looking forward to its successor..

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

Hi Folk,
Thought I would chip in here as I am a big Chord Electronics fan and have numerous CE items including the QBD76 DAC.
 
I have heard the Hugo both as a headphone amp and as a DAC in a speaker system.  
 
I own (last 2 years) the full Choral system i.e. Blu CD Transporter, QBD76 DAC, Prima Pre-Amp and two Mezzo 140's connected to Focal Electra 1038 Be's. 
 
The QBD76 DAC is far superior to the Hugo in every way when run in full balanced mode for a speaker system and single RCA Headphone system (connected to my Woo Audio WA6 SE). 
 
If you compare the sound with soup…the QBD76 is the thick vegetable soup and the Hugo the watery onion soup.    The QBD76 gets you closer to an analogue sound especially in balanced mode.  
 
When the QBD76 is connected to the Blu CD Transporter as a twin digital input signal which up-samples the signal from the Blu to the QBD76 to 176kHz its on another planet….even closer to pure analogue sound from a good turntable set up (I have the Origin Live Resolution Turntable, Origin Live Conquerour tonearm too to compare).   The Hugo doesn't even come close.   Even playing hi-res files from MacBook Pro using Audivana software and a good quality USB cable the Blue and QBD76 combination for me sounds much better with more character without loosing the nice fine details or having too high sparkly treble.  
 
Of course the Choral system is a system with ultimate system synergy as Chord developed the individual products over time to work effectively together.   
 
I have also listened to the DSX1000 with Chord reference amps in speaker systems over a number of Shows but I wasn't that impressed with the overall sound for the price…..and still prefer the Blu & QBD76 combo.  Also the Choral system looks awesome (and very different) than most other hi-fi systems !  
 
The new QBD76 coming out next year may be amazing for very hi-res files (of which there still isnt a great selection out there at the moment for all genres of music) but I still think the Blu Transporter will still be better for overall music enjoyment. 
 
I have ordered both the HeadAmp GS-X Mk2 for HD800's and BHSE for Stax 009's (also just ordered from Japan) and will connect the Blu and QBD76 to them in balanced mode and run the HD800's balanced.  
 
Im a big fan of proper fully balanced systems so comparing the QBD76 to the Hugo isn't a fair comparison as the Hugo cannot run balanced (inputs or outputs) so doesn't sound so good even with later chip technology.  Of course balanced vs single is more prominent with speaker systems than headphone systems but still noticeable even with portable systems (I also have the ALO Audio Rx Mk3 B and Cypher Labs Algorhythm Duet & Solo -dB and have used them both single and balanced…..balanced wins hands down).  

 

[shaizada]

Completely agree Bonesy!  Thanks for posting....I share the EXACT same opinion.  Using the QBD76HDSD version which I have, the Hugo was excellent in comparison, but not in the same ballpark as the QBD via balanced output.
 
I've been curious to use a Chord Blue Transport.  Currently using a Goldmund Mimesis 39 (uses the amazing Phillips CDM9 Pro).  Seeing how I my music is less and less cd based, I've been pondering over the BLU transport, which seems to be a natural companion to the QBD Dac via the dual connectors.
 
Nice setup!

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

  Completely agree Bonesy!  Thanks for posting....I share the EXACT same opinion.  Using the QBD76HDSD version which I have, the Hugo was excellent in comparison, but not in the same ballpark as the QBD via balanced output.
 
I've been curious to use a Chord Blue Transport.  Currently using a Goldmund Mimesis 39 (uses the amazing Phillips CDM9 Pro).  Seeing how I my music is less and less cd based, I've been pondering over the BLU transport, which seems to be a natural companion to the QBD Dac via the dual connectors.
 
Nice setup!

Hi Shaizada,
The synergy and overall sound of the Blu is awesome with the QBD76 in up-sampling dual signal mode….you won't be disappointed.   You will find it very enjoyable to listen too.   Its very important though that you have very high quality interconnecting cables especially the dual digital signal cables.   I use Tellurium Q Black throughout. 
 
Even much higher end CD based systems from Naim and Vitus which I have spent some hours listening too in hifi shop demo's to my ears don't sound as good.  
 
Just wished the Blu had an electric motor for opening and closing the lid like the Red Reference MkIII CD & DAC unit.  
 
Note that an older QBD76 is just as good with the Blu as the newer versions with HDSD as the Blu signal doesnt use the HDSD side of the DAC.  Thats only for the High-Res files.    
 
Also the Blu & QBD76 combination will show up poorly recorded & mixed music but will make good recordings shine….and excellent recordings audio nirvana bliss.   
 
In the real world I think its better to have a system that can play many 1000's of CD's on the market across all genres of music…..than have the latest DAC that can play very high-res files but limited in number and genres of music (mainly classical at the moment with some jazz…very little in mainstream pop and rock) and much more expensive to buy.  
 
To be honest I think at the moment this his-res file business with super HD DACS is a bit of a marketing bloy.    This was evident when this year at the Bristol HiFi Show in the UK I heard the reference Naim system connected to Focal's top model Grand Utopia (the Naim reference system was specifically built to get the best out of the Grand Utopia's from Focal's CEO instruction).  This system cost over £300,000 and sounded absolutely out of this world.  After the demo I asked Naim's CEO what resolution the Hi-Res files were to which he answered…sir they are standard red Book CD files and MP3 files…….my jaw touched the floor with amazement….    

 

[isquirrel]

My finding's too,
 
Initially I was very impressed by the Hugo, I had not heard digital sound this good before. However I yearned for more. Hence my exploration into purchasing a high end DAC. The QBD76 HDSD was a natural choice to audition. It is a demo unit.

Unfortunately it is having major issues and several times has refused to lock onto any signal using either USB or S/PDIF requiring a mains unplug and leave for 30 mins. Frustrating!

I had auditioned the Chord DSX1000 streamer which according to the dealer has the same DAC as the QBD76 and was not impressed.

So my initial findings with the QBD76 really surprised me, I even phoned Chord to ask if I was hearing things, of course they said the Hugo is the latest and greatest and they confirmed that they will be releasing a new QBD76 very soon. So I won't be buying this one, but will be sad to see it go, in fact I am coming up with a plan to try and hold onto it until the replacement comes it sounds so good.

The QBD76 sounds very good, substantially better than the Hugo. In fact I really doubted myself so I had my partner to have a good listen to the pair (those female ears!) and her findings were even stronger than mine. In fact it makes the Hugo sound thin and strained. The QBD has much better tonal colours, soundstage and separation. It sounds fuller with much better bass. It summary it sounds much richer. 

ATM all my listening has been using the AP1SE & PP. Funny, I think that has a sound sig because it retains some aspects from my listening experience with other DAC's. If I can get this unit to stabilise I will do a test of high res PCM and DSD. This unit will play single S/PDIF input 24/192 no problem. My experience with the AP1 & PP is different to others, I prefer using it over USB on the Hugo. I will let you know it goes with the QBD76 HDSD vs the USB input.
 
​I find that setting the buffer to Max size = best SQ
 
The more I listen to the QBD76 and think about my journey to date with Head-Fi. I come to the following conclusions:

The system was built around the sonic signature of the Hugo

1 Therefore i can now see how I have ended with the valve selection I have now in the Studio Six, all of it has been aimed at increasing the tonal palette and texture of the sound.

2 The use of the AP1 and S/PDIF cables to soften and attempt to make the sound more delicate.

3 Buying LCD-3's as I felt that the LCD-X was too revealing a headphone, even a little harsh at times.

Listening to the QBD76 with all of the above, add's flavour, however its now optional and I don't have to compromise other areas anymore - LCD-X's for instance now sound fine. Largest test is I am listening to more music and varied music styles.

When going back to the Hugo it sounds good but not at the QBD76 level.
 

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

  My finding's too,
 
Initially I was very impressed by the Hugo, I had not heard digital sound this good before. However I yearned for more. Hence my exploration into purchasing a high end DAC. The QBD76 HDSD was a natural choice to audition. It is a demo unit.

Unfortunately it is having major issues and several times has refused to lock onto any signal using either USB or S/PDIF requiring a mains unplug and leave for 30 mins. Frustrating!

I had auditioned the Chord DSX1000 streamer which according to the dealer has the same DAC as the QBD76 and was not impressed.

So my initial findings with the QBD76 really surprised me, I even phoned Chord to ask if I was hearing things, of course they said the Hugo is the latest and greatest and they confirmed that they will be releasing a new QBD76 very soon. So I won't be buying this one, but will be sad to see it go, in fact I am coming up with a plan to try and hold onto it until the replacement comes it sounds so good.

The QBD76 sounds very good, substantially better than the Hugo. In fact I really doubted myself so I had my partner to have a good listen to the pair (those female ears!) and her findings were even stronger than mine. In fact it makes the Hugo sound thin and strained. The QBD has much better tonal colours, soundstage and separation. It sounds fuller with much better bass. It summary it sounds much richer. 

ATM all my listening has been using the AP1SE & PP. Funny, I think that has a sound sig because it retains some aspects from my listening experience with other DAC's. If I can get this unit to stabilise I will do a test of high res PCM and DSD. This unit will play single S/PDIF input 24/192 no problem. My experience with the AP1 & PP is different to others, I prefer using it over USB on the Hugo. I will let you know it goes with the QBD76 HDSD vs the USB input.
 
​I find that setting the buffer to Max size = best SQ
 
The more I listen to the QBD76 and think about my journey to date with Head-Fi. I come to the following conclusions:

The system was built around the sonic signature of the Hugo

1 Therefore i can now see how I have ended with the valve selection I have now in the Studio Six, all of it has been aimed at increasing the tonal palette and texture of the sound.

2 The use of the AP1 and S/PDIF cables to soften and attempt to make the sound more delicate.

3 Buying LCD-3's as I felt that the LCD-X was too revealing a headphone, even a little harsh at times.

Listening to the QBD76 with all of the above, add's flavour, however its now optional and I don't have to compromise other areas anymore - LCD-X's for instance now sound fine. Largest test is I am listening to more music and varied music styles.

When going back to the Hugo it sounds good but not at the QBD76 level.
 

++ A    Nice write up isquirrel.    Lovely set up you have there.     Yes you are exactly right with the set up.   You definitely don't have to compromise with other items down the train with the QBD76 except for good quality recordings.     
 
Strange about the issue you have with USB.   Have you tried Audirvana Plus ?.   I use this software and have no problems with it at all for all file types as long as I have disabled iTunes and only use ITunes as the carrier.    Make sure you are also using a good quality USB or S/PDIF cable…it makes a big difference.  
 
I recommend 100% though for you to try and demo the Chord Electronics Blu.   You even set the buffer to zero….the Blue is that good !   

 

[isquirrel]

Thank you, I am using Audirvana + independent of iTunes in integer mode. I have just checked out the Blu, interesting, hmm must arrange an audition. I use either Nordost Heimdall 2 S/PDIF and or USB or Vertere iFi 2, both excellent cables.

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

  Thank you, I am using Audirvana + independent of iTunes in integer mode. I have just checked out the Blu, interesting, hmm must arrange an audition. I use either Nordost Heimdall 2 S/PDIF and or USB or Vertere iFi 2, both excellent cables.

++ A   Nice one isquirrel
 
You may be able to find a Blu second hand for a lot less than full price from Chord although if you bought a new one you can customise the surface finish i.e. full chrome or polished jet black or only the lid chromed etc as opposed to the standard silver or black aluminium finish.     
 
I haven't heard Chord's Reference Mk3 CD Player which has the motorised CD lid/door (which doesn't have the latest HDSD part of the DAC) but I have heard that the Blu & QBD76 sounds better ! 

 

[shaizada]

Great writeup guys! Earlier, I've been hearing all this talk about the Hugo being better than the QBD76.  I thought, maybe its possible.  I had to check it out for myself.  When I finally did a side by side between the Hugo and the QBD76HDSD, I thought people are going deaf! 
 
I would have loved to sell my QBD76HDSD and buy the Hugo if it was better.  Would have put some funds BACK into my pocket for other things.  
It's a pipe dream...the QBD76HDSD through the balanced outputs betters the Hugo in every single area possible.  
 
Hugo might be an amazing portable solution, it IS an amazing portable solution.  However, it is definitely NOT a home dac replacement for the QBD76HDSD.