[MAURO16164]

 

 

 


abbastanza soddisfatto con la mia nuova configurazione ..

​

 

[dguitarnut]

Mamá mía , mamá mía ........fígaro

Bravisimo!

 

[Whazzzup]

My finances won't like it either when the Chord Hugo 2 or Chord Hugo TT 2 is released  . I'm obviously going to upgrade then.

I have the impression that your finances are safe for a while. There's no sign of a planned upgrade, as apparently Rob is working on his Davina project. I would personally prefer if Chord was revising its chordette range to suit the 2qute rather than upgrading the Hugo and Hugo TT who don't need it.

Agree, on the chord site they have recommended Apple users do not upgrade to El Capitan, except for Hugo,TT, and Dave owners.

 

[Mediahound]

Is the Hugo TT fully balanced? I know the amp section is not but I'm wondering about the DAC (since it has balanced outs). 

 

[Whazzzup]

  Is the Hugo TT fully balanced? I know the amp section is not but I'm wondering about the DAC (since it has balanced outs). 

No 1/4 se out for hp, xlr balanced out for a pre amp.

 

[Mediahound]

 
No 1/4 se out for hp, xlr balanced out for a pre amp.

Right. So is the DAC a balanced DAC?

 

[MacedonianHero]

 
Right. So is the DAC a balanced DAC?

 
As mentioned the headphone output is SE, but the TT does have balanced outputs to feed a balanced amplifier if you so need. 

 

[Mediahound]

As mentioned the headphone output is SE, but the TT does have balanced outputs to feed a balanced amplifier if you so need. 

Having balanced outs does not necessarily mean the dac itself is balanced.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Having balanced outs does not necessarily mean the dac itself is balanced.

 
"- Fully balanced outputs using XLR connectors"
 
From Chord's site. So each L and R would have it's own separate ground for being "fully balanced".

 

[Mediahound]

"- Fully balanced outputs using XLR connectors"

From Chord's site. So each L and R would have it's own separate ground for being "fully balanced".

That doesn't mean anything to me, doesn't state whether or not the dac is balanced.

Example, the Centrance HiFi m8 says the same thing but it turns out the balanced out is there just for convenience and the amp/dac runs single ended.

 

[MacedonianHero]

That doesn't mean anything to me, doesn't state whether or not the dac is balanced.

Example, the Centrance HiFi m8 says the same thing but it turns out the balanced out is there just for convenience and the amp/dac runs single ended.

 
Being "fully" balanced requires a separate ground for each L and R channels. If the output have that, then that's all that matters if you're going to hook it up to a balanced amplifier. Internally how the DAC operates is purely academic.

 

[Mediahound]

Being "fully" balanced requires a separate ground for each L and R channels. If the output have that, then that's all that matters if you're going to hook it up to a balanced amplifier. Internally how the DAC operates is purely academic.

Not quite, a truly balanced DAC will actually have double the amount of digital to analog chips internally than a single ended.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Not quite, a truly balanced DAC will actually have double the amount of digital to analog chips internally than a single ended.

 
Again...still academic...depends on those chips. Would you rather have 2 "off the shelf" and "meh nothing special" chips or one that really nails it? I think it's best for Rob to step in here.

 

[Mediahound]

Again...still academic...depends on those chips. Would you rather have 2 "off the shelf" and "meh nothing special" chips or one that really nails it? I think it's best for Rob to step in here.

I'm not asking about what I want or don't want, I'm asking about how the cord Hugo TT actually is.

 

[x RELIC x]

The DAC itself is SE (as in only one DAC) but the output is split to a differential output for connection to a balanced amplifier. This isn't a bad thing at all with Rob's DACs.

Click below to read why.

Spoiler: Rob and John on SE vs balanced DACs from the Mojo thread - the TT is the same

Originally Posted by Mojo ideas View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDerrick View Post

Of course the balanced output is going to be better than the Mojo, the Mojo doesn't have balanced output.

No that simply is not correct! A single ended design, done right with a large enough voltage swing will easily out perform a balanced output. Balanced designs are used by some designers to overcome inherent limitations within designs. Usually to overcome substrate noise on the chip that shouldn't be there or to increase the output voltage swing of their amplifiers. We don't suffer those limitation or problems so we don't need a dodgy fix for them. Our measurements clearly show this. Sorry to burst you bubble man.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo ideas View Post

Balance operation is a fix for problems we don't have. We have no substrate noise and we have plenty of output swing. Single ended done right is far better than a balanced design far less distortion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Watts View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by agisthos View Post
Rob you should give a definitive 'why SE is better' explanation. Get it over with, because many (most) audiophiles have been biased towards balanced and are not going to understand where you are coming from.

One good argument I heard from the Densen founder (Thomas Sillesen) is that each half of the signwave runs through a series of components that will always have tolerances different from each other, so when combining the signal they will not ever match, causing an increase in distortion (of some kind I cannot remember).

Charles Hanson, of Ayre, who is a proponent of fully balanced equipment, has even stated that for pure sound quality SE will always sound better, but this is on the bench, where the power supply and analog signal stages can be kept physically apart. When putting them in a box he prefers balanced.

Well this is a complex subject, and sometimes a balanced connection does sound better than single ended (SE) - in a pre-power context - but it depends upon the environment, and the pre and power and the interconnect. But the downside of balanced is that you are doubling the number of analogue components in the direct signal path, and this degrades transparency. In my experience every passive component is audible, every metal to metal interface (including solder joints - I once had a lot of fun listening to solder) has an impact - in case of metal/metal interfaces it degrades detail resolution and the perception of depth. So going balanced will have a cost in transparency.

In DAC design, going balanced is essential with silicon design; there is simply too much substrate noise and other effects not too. But with discrete DAC's you do not need to worry about this, so going SE on a discrete DAC is possible, and is how all my DAC's are done. But differential operation hides certain problems (notably reference circuit) that has serious SQ effects; so going SE means those problems are exposed, which forces one to solve the issue fundamentally. In short, to make SE work you have to solve many more problems, but the result of solving those problems solves SQ issues than differential operation hides when you do measurements.

Rob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Watts View Post

Component count is very important for transparency. Doubling the number of parts in the direct signal path does degrade depth perception and detail resolution.

But there is another problem with balanced operation. Imagine a balanced differential in, differential out amplifier. The input stage is normally a differential pair (maybe cascoded) with a constant current source. Now the input stage is free to move up and down to accommodate the common mode voltage - but the input stage common mode impedance is non linear, and if the common mode voltage has a signal component (it always will have due to component tolerances) then this will create a signal dependent error current, thereby generating distortion. Unfortunately, the negative feedback loop of the amplifier can't correct for this distortion as it can't see the error on the summing nodes. So there will always be a limit to the performance. With SE operation, this problem does not occur, as the differential input stage is clamped to ground.

Now DAC designers are well aware of this - that's why all high performance DAC's use two single ended I to V converters from the current OP of the DAC's, then use a differential to SE converter to create the voltage OP. There are other reasons for doing this as well, as the DAC requires a very low impedance virtual ground for low distortion, and you can only get this using dual SE amps - another problem is RF and its much easier to decouple SE than differentially - this in turn creates a lot more noise floor modulation, making it sound less smooth.

But for me the most important is transparency. I had an amp that had two modes - differential or SE - listening in balanced mode flattened the sound stage depth dramatically,and it sounded harder, less smooth. That said, there are circumstances when balanced operation can be better than SE, for example when you are looking at connecting a pre-amp to a power amp, and what is best depends upon particular circumstances. In short, if SE operation is noisy, try balanced.

Rob