Chord Hugo TT High End DAC Amp Impressions Thread

[Deftone]

Look at the Hugo 2 specs. It still does not include most all the things the Hugo TT includes vis-a-vis the article. 

As rob said Hugo 2 uses a lot of trickle down from dave and some parts of code even better refind than dave, because of this imo Hugo 2 should sound quite a bit better than the Hugo TT

 

[MacedonianHero]

As rob said Hugo 2 uses a lot of trickle down from dave and some parts of code even better refind than dave, because of this imo Hugo 2 should sound quite a bit better than the Hugo TT

 
There is so much more to DACs than just a chipset (like the analog section, implementation, etc..); there are more differences to the TT that cannot be implemented in a portable unit due to power implications and form factor. Moon Audio did a great job summing up some of these differences:
 
http://blog.moon-audio.com/chord-hugo-versus-hugo-tt-differences-explained/
 
I've heard DACs based on the ESS Sabre chip from $1000 to $5000 and the latter was a good step up from the "other things" in the DAC beyond the chipset.
 
So for portability, it does look like the Hugo 2 will be a killer unit, but for those who are using it in a desktop application and need things like galvanic isolation, balanced outputs to feed into a balanced amplifier, supercapacitors, improved power supply, etc..., the TT looks to fill the void until you look to make the leap to the DAVE.
 
I am looking forward to reviewing the Hugo 2 and the Poly for the Mojo!

 

[Mediahound]

As rob said Hugo 2 uses a lot of trickle down from dave and some parts of code even better refind than dave, because of this imo Hugo 2 should sound quite a bit better than the Hugo TT

Could be mostly hype. The Hugo is supposed to sound better than the Mojo too, but it doesn't.

 

[ubs28]

   
There is so much more to DACs than just a chipset (like the analog section, implementation, etc..); there are more differences to the TT that cannot be implemented in a portable unit due to power implications and form factor. Moon Audio did a great job summing up some of these differences:
 
http://blog.moon-audio.com/chord-hugo-versus-hugo-tt-differences-explained/
 
I've heard DACs based on the ESS Sabre chip from $1000 to $5000 and the latter was a good step up from the "other things" in the DAC beyond the chipset.
 
So for portability, it does look like the Hugo 2 will be a killer unit, but for those who are using it in a desktop application and need things like galvanic isolation, balanced outputs to feed into a balanced amplifier, supercapacitors, improved power supply, etc..., the TT looks to fill the void until you look to make the leap to the DAVE.
 
I am looking forward to reviewing the Hugo 2 and the Poly for the Mojo!

 
It highly depends. The Hugo 2 has to sound alot better than the Mojo in order to give up the portability of the Mojo. Especially with the Mojo + Poly combo. It's not just about sound quality but also the form factor.

 

[MacedonianHero]

It highly depends. The Hugo 2 has to sound alot better than the Mojo in order to give up the portability of the Mojo. Especially with the Mojo + Poly combo. It's not just about sound quality but also the form factor.

Different tools for different applications I guess for portability vs desktop. For portability, you have to make more sacrifices for size and power savings. I (like Jude) prefer the Mojo to the Hugo, but both need to be small and exclusively driven by portable batteries. Right off the bat this limits your power supply which, in turn affects galvanic isolation and over all sound quality., I'm curious to see how the Hugo 2 stacks up.

 

[Whazzzup]

 

Look at the Hugo 2 specs. It still does not include most all the things the Hugo TT includes vis-a-vis the article. 

As rob said Hugo 2 uses a lot of trickle down from dave and some parts of code even better refind than dave, because of this imo Hugo 2 should sound quite a bit better than the Hugo TT

from a purely marketing sense, this doesn't make sense

 

[Deftone]

No need to get so defensive guys
Why are you being sour over the Hugo 2 because it could possibly be quite a bit better than the TT even though it cost less? I never said the TT is bad, The truth is there will always be something better, sit back and enjoy what you have don't let it stress you out so much.

 

[miketlse]

 
from a purely marketing sense, this doesn't make sense

 
But from a 'product line engineering' point of view it makes full sense.
You pilot the increased no. of taps in one product (hugo 2), then if it proves successful, you incrementally update your other product lines (hugo TT, 2Qute). Mojo would be the last to be updated, because it already has that no. of taps, but runs at half the clockspeed, so you would increase the clockspeed for mojo.  

 

[MacedonianHero]

No need to get so defensive guys
Why are you being sour over the Hugo 2 because it could possibly be quite a bit better than the TT even though it cost less? I never said the TT is bad, The truth is there will always be something better, sit back and enjoy what you have don't let it stress you out so much.

No one is being defensive...at least I am not...just trying to help set the record straight...there are sacrifices that you have to make for portability as I noted and I truly hope that the Hugo 2 will be a big improvement over the Hugo (as I preferred the Mojo). That said, taps...schmaps as far as I'm concerned as per my previous post that there is so much more to a DAC than the chipset and I hope newer members will read up on this further. Rather, some seem hopeful to not spend the funds for a TT thinking that the Hugo 2 might suffice.

 Power supply, analog circuitry, galvanic isolation, balanced outputs to feed into a balanced amplifier in order to run the amp fully balanced to use 100% of the circuitry...all make some serious differences that should be considered! I will be reviewing the Hugo 2 hopefully soon and I'm really excited to hear what Chord has done with it, but A-Bing with my TT will be hard if I use it as a standalone DAC as it doesn't have balanced outputs and galvanic isolation.
 
The balanced outs are a MUST for the GS-X Mk2 as it is a fully balanced amplifier and will only engage 100% of the amp's power with balanced inputs. I can try running the Hugo 2 with unbalanced outputs, but as mentioned, the GS-X mk2 will be effectively reduced to a GS-1 and that handicap isn't totally fair. But if I where to go on a vacation, the Hugo 2 would be the better choice...right tool for the right job as they say.
 
I noted this before and it might be worth re-iterating...many DACs use the ESS9018 chipset. Some cost under $1000 and some over $5000. I've heard many with this chipset in the various price points using this chipset and the higher end DACs do sound better because of the things I just mentioned. 
 
The folks at Chord seem to think per their post that the TT is just fine the way it is must know something that some conjecture here doesn't; otherwise the TT2 would be out much sooner:
 

There are no plans at present for a 2 for TT this is because the T T always had significantly better performance as a desktop the The original Hugo this was due to a better pulse array PSU arrangement and of course the far larger and more capable battery and ultra cap internal power supplies. Therefore the Hugo TT is still good to go.

 
 

Not for a good while yet.

 

 

[Whazzzup]

No need to get so defensive guys
Why are you being sour over the Hugo 2 because it could possibly be quite a bit better than the TT even though it cost less? I never said the TT is bad, The truth is there will always be something better, sit back and enjoy what you have don't let it stress you out so much.

No stress I'm grooving on TT and GSX MK2 right now.
Hugo is fine for me so no need to upgrade that as a portable. still waiting for noble encore and my DHC silver litz type 4 occ 8 braid.

 

[Whazzzup]

 

 
from a purely marketing sense, this doesn't make sense

 
But from a 'product line engineering' point of view it makes full sense.
You pilot the increased no. of taps in one product (hugo 2), then if it proves successful, you incrementally update your other product lines (hugo TT, 2Qute). Mojo would be the last to be updated, because it already has that no. of taps, but runs at half the clockspeed, so you would increase the clockspeed for mojo.  

No it doesn't from a marketing standpoint. Im happy for hugo 2 but i doubt the plan, as frank stated there are no plans because of superior pulse array, super capacitors, flip flops and the like to upgrade TT. Was for a portable to technically and sonically destroy the desktop segment for a product thats only two years old and has more margin. More than likely mojo was eating hugo and a better hugo was a response for product differentiation. Again i don't care either way and hugo 2 I hope will be a desktop substitute for as many folks as possible. I have stated that hugo consumers have been trying that and going as far as external boxes, frankenstiening batteries etc....
 
Lastly exciting times at chord  and i look forward to all developments from chord including a new desktop one year.

 

[miketlse]

 
No it doesn't from a marketing standpoint. Im happy for hugo 2 but i doubt the plan, as frank stated there are no plans because of superior pulse array, super capacitors, flip flops and the like to upgrade TT. Was for a portable to technically and sonically destroy the desktop segment for a product thats only two years old and has more margin. More than likely mojo was eating hugo and a better hugo was a response for product differentiation. Again i don't care either way and hugo 2 I hope will be a desktop substitute for as many folks as possible. I have stated that hugo consumers have been trying that and going as far as external boxes, frankenstiening batteries etc....
 
Lastly exciting times at chord  and i look forward to all developments from chord including a new desktop one year.

No problem; I was not debating the marketing aspect - but the product line engineering point of view.

 

 

[musickid]

as the tt is already galvanically isolated would adding an intona help. is this double isolation or would the great benefits of the intona surely still help?

 

[quantx]

After ample A/B listening with TT and HPA8-C, I parted ways with the TT.
Found TT more punchy/meaty, but decided HPA8-C was more musical,
even if more lightfooted.
Finally, QBD76 seemed to me a better DAC than TT.
Maybe it's just me.
So I decided to go the DAVE way…

 

[Whazzzup]

After ample A/B listening with TT and HPA8-C, I parted ways with the TT.
Found TT more punchy/meaty, but decided HPA8-C was more musical,
even if more lightfooted.
Finally, QBD76 seemed to me a better DAC than TT.
Maybe it's just me.

Funny I kept both a8 and TT. Found TT better timber, tighter bass slam, more musical, better balance, mid detail. The toms and snare sounded more real and gsx mk2 and hd800S under TT is by far the better pairing. Detail is very good.
Hpa8 is solely run via la900 full Lawton mod. I find the sub bass extension sublime and the kick drum thumps. The a8 is closer to live Marshall stack feel while the TT is more studio and portrays true musicality for me. So the la900 a8 combo is my fun combo, TT is my music appreciation combo. I frankly thought about going the other way and sell my a8 keep TT gsx mk2 combo, but just can't do it, so both are on my desk. Enjoy both for different reasons.