[Here2rock]

  Windows PC --> Audioquest diamond usb cable--> HugoTT --> Stealth Indra IC(RCA) --> Rudistor RP010B headphone amp --> Hifiman HEKv2/Grado PS1000e/LCD4 headphones.
 
(I also have a Headamp GSX2 amp that I have used instead of the Rudistor amp and it also sounds great, but I prefer the Rudistor because I listen to popular music like the Beatles and such and I like the Rudistor's warm/plump/full signature a lot.)
I don't need any EQ with the HEK or the Grado phones. I use Jriver with my own ripped CDs or Tidal.
It's a really fine sounding system to my ears; full of life, bloom, detail and not fatiguing.
 
(The power cord for the Rudistor amp is a Shunyata Anaconda Alpha, about 10 years old. There is no power conditioning. Without the amp, direct from the TT, there just isn't as much fullness/bloom/bass-power as I desire. The amps just seem to make the music fall out of the headphones with no sweat.)
 
 

 
Thank you for sharing your setup, I think you are not the only who have mentioned that Chord TT needs an external amp to really shine. Perhaps I was hoping for a magic box for $6,800 (AUD) to do all but there is no such thing in Hi Fi sound I guess. 
 
When you start to add a quality Amp on top for at least $5,000, Headphones $3,000-5,000, it become a very expensive set up around $15,000 and plus (all in AUD). 

 

[AlanYWM]

   
I don't believe there was anything wrong with the setup, I plug in the cables a couple of times as I was switching between Hugo TT and Oppo HA-1 just to find the difference between the two.

 
If there is nothing wrong with the setup, then the only logically conclusion is that your hearing preference is way off from the rest of us. The TT cannot "sound a way lot" worse than the "Logitech 2.1 speakers with my PC." At least not to the many folks here who have heard the TT.

 

[Delayeed]

LMAO I've had a lot of logitech ***** 2.1 and 5.1s and they all suck a fat DICK compared to any decent headphone setup/ studio monitor setup

 

[gonzfi]

This is my first step into the serious high end of Headphones Hi-Fi. I currently listen to music on my PC, this has been the case for last 10 years or so as I had very little time devoting listening to music. I currently use Logitech 2.1 speakers with my PC which cost me about $500 a while back, to be honest they sound a way lot more better than the Hugo TT + LCD 3 or any other combination I tried costing 10 times or more than those speakers.

This is directly in conflict with the general view that the headphones are the least expensive way to get great sound. 

I would agree with this. In fact I find I get better audio quality from an old Nokia I bought in 2005. Are there other examples out there of unusually terrible sound sources that are better than the TT?

 

[Here2rock]

I am not of the view if it is expensive it must be great!

The Logitech speakers I have are rated very highly on Amazon and in other reviews.

https://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Z-2300-THX-Certified-Speaker-Subwoofer/dp/B0002SQ2P2

This is quoted from CNET

"
The bottom line Logitech's Z-2300s have been on the market for more than half a decade, but these PC speakers still pack a sonic wallop."

My PC speakers are not just sitting on my desk, I have mounted them on stands and it makes a massive difference. You can certainly get a decent audio out of these speakers if set up correctly, I spent a couple of hundred on the stands and money was well spent. No regrets.

It ishould be laughable that a $500 speaker set should be better than Hugo TT (without an amp) and it is.

I have spent thousands of dollars on car audio equipment, modifications and full size traditional Hi Fi in the past.

In short I should know a thing or two about audio sound quality.

 

[Delayeed]

This is quoted from CNET

"
The bottom line Logitech's Z-2300s have been on the market for more than half a decade, but these PC speakers still pack a sonic wallop."

It ishould be laughable that a $500 speaker set should be better than Hugo TT (without an amp) and it is.

I have spent thousands of dollars on car audio equipment, modifications and full size traditional Hi Fi in the past.

In short I should know a thing or two about audio sound quality.

Yes you should, but apparently don't. Car audio sucks. It's a small place where certain frequencies are boosted a lot more than others. Phase cancellations etc not even mentioning the acoustics.

Also I don't understand how you compare a DAC/amp to a 2.1 system. It makes no sense what so ever and just makes you look like a troll.
(Which you don't seem to be)

To me seems like you just like that **** "Hi-Fi" sound more than accuracy of sound reproduction. That's fine, save your money.

Also quoting CNET is the funniest thing I've seen on this site in a while.

 

[rgs9200m]

The argument about whether the Chord products benefit from an external amp seems to never end.
But my philosophy is that I like to choose a DAC that suits me sonically and amp that does the same, and it's unlikely I will get both from the same place just by chance.
And that's what I've found from my listening experience.
 
When I was into speaker-based systems, I never ended up using a preamp and power amp from the same brand, much less a CD player, and I think this is analogous.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[jlbrach]

There is no need for an external amp with the TT if you use easy to drives HP's such as the Elear,Utopia,Ether,HE1000,LCD-3,LCD-X and many others....if on the other hand one chooses the LCD-4 or HE-6 then yes an external amp is a good idea

 

[rgs9200m]

I think saying there is no need for another amp assumes too much. There is a certain sound, a sonic signature, to listening directly through the Chords (the Hugo and Hugo TT for me).
There will be different signature with an amp attached. Call it a coloration or whatever, it's different nonetheless. Someone may like it or not, but it's not an objective fact that everyone will like the direct sound better.
And if you like an amped sound better, then there is a need. It's a definite need. That's certainly true in my case.

 

[rgs9200m]

Just to follow up, years ago I tried a Placette passive preamp (the top model) in my speaker-based system that I had back then.
I didn't like it and went back to my tube preamp and sent the Placette back to them for a refund in their trial period and told them my reasons.
I was told "you must just like distortion."
So he just summarily dismissed the entire tube-preamp owner population as having tin ears basically. That always annoyed me as totally arrogant.

 

[JaZZ]

  Just to follow up, years ago I tried a Placette passive preamp (the top model) in my speaker-based system that I had back then.
I didn't like it and went back to my tube preamp and sent the Placette back to them for a refund in their trial period and told them my reasons.
I was told "you must just like distortion."
So he just summarily dismissed the entire tube-preamp owner population as having tin ears basically. That always annoyed me as totally arrogant.

 
I guess that was that person's honest opinion – but he shouldn't have worded it that way towards a customer, he could have been more diplomatic. However, that's what Rob Watts uses to say as well: «Some people like harmonic distortion.» And he is absolutely right in my opinion.
 
I did the same years ago: replaced my Conrad-Johnson PV6 preamp by a carefully populated resistor-based passive attenuator. I was shocked about the thinness, dryness and brittleness. This was during my speaker-builder era, and my then prototypes were tuned to a sound with the tube amp in the chain – which means a lot of forgivingness and euphony, especially considering the delicate fourth-order filters in the crossover networks requiring extreme precision. So I had to spend a few further weeks for perfecting them. After that, the system sounded better than ever: more detail and resolution, better transient response, better dynamics. Since this experience I'm convinced that amps – no matter if tubes or transistors – make the sound more forgiving (to any existing tonal flaws in the chain, particularly from the sound transducers) by reducing transparency and accuracy. Some further experiments with headphone amps compared to the direct connection clearly confirmed this notion.

 

[miketlse]

  Just to follow up, years ago I tried a Placette passive preamp (the top model) in my speaker-based system that I had back then.
I didn't like it and went back to my tube preamp and sent the Placette back to them for a refund in their trial period and told them my reasons.
I was told "you must just like distortion."
So he just summarily dismissed the entire tube-preamp owner population as having tin ears basically. That always annoyed me as totally arrogant.

 
There is no getting away from the fact that valve amps introduce second harmonic distortion.
 
You were given an honest answer, but took umbrage at it.
Presumably you would have preferred a more diplomatic response, which would involve half-lying to you, to avoid hurting your feelings.
 
It is always your wallet, so you are free to choose whether to buy from salesmen who give you honest/truthful answers, or diplomatic answers.

 

[Here2rock]

  Yes you should, but apparently don't. Car audio sucks. It's a small place where certain frequencies are boosted a lot more than others. Phase cancellations etc not even mentioning the acoustics.

Also I don't understand how you compare a DAC/amp to a 2.1 system. It makes no sense what so ever and just makes you look like a troll.
(Which you don't seem to be)

To me seems like you just like that **** "Hi-Fi" sound more than accuracy of sound reproduction. That's fine, save your money.

Also quoting CNET is the funniest thing I've seen on this site in a while.

 
How do you define the accuracy of sound reproduction? To me it is like you are there, in the front-center row of a concert ,listening each and individual instrument coming from left and right, clear vocals which are never overshadowed by the instruments, they are the supporting act for the artist, allowing him to shine his/her talent. I felt none of these with Huggo TT ( I am sorry If I am making the lovers of TT upset by this comment but this is not my intention, I can only write how I felt), what I experienced was mono sound coming out of the headphones, the left speaker was identical to the right channel, the instruments were overbearing the vocals, there was no sound stage, no details or depth in the music. On the positive notes there was no hint of distortion, plenty of headroom for all of the headphones I tried and run very cold (I might add just like the sound).
 
 
When you make an opinion which does not concur with the others you can be leveled as troll. This was not my intention at all, I am baffled myself, I read all these reviews not only online from Headphones audiophiles sites (I often read these with a grain of salt as some of these are commercially motivated) but the actual end-users like this one. I am probably the only person with a negative review on Hugo TT.
 
I have not completely given up on Hugo TT, I am planning to have another extended listen with it.
 
The problem in Australia is that you don't have the luxury of 30 days trial period period like you do in the USA, there is no luxury of listening in your own time and environment. Once you make the purchase, you are stuck with it or sell on the second hand market.
 
Happy New Year to everyone. 

 

[rgs9200m]

I did not like the comment about me liking distortion because it would logically apply to anyone who preferred any tube amp at any cost (or at least a preamp).
That's a pretty huge collection of people, a whole class of them.
I think that's kind of a stretch. 
And that is what the fellow from Placette was saying (there was more to the conversation, and his meaning was crystal clear, and it was definitely negative, even when I mentioned bloom and texture and the like).
 
And just to bring things back to the TT, it's the same thing basically, where amping it does expand and add body to the images, much to my liking.
 
But I am not doctrinaire on this subject. Once I had an Accuphase DP700 cd player, and I felt it sounded better and more lifelike and well defined directly using its own level control without a preamp in the loop (an expensive one too).
So it's definitely a case-by-case thing. 
But I feel the Hugo and the Hugo TT needed some plumping up, and then they are wonderful. I wouldn't have upgraded from the original Hugo to the TT version if I wasn't a major fan of them.
There is a continuity and lack of grain and real sense of speed and delicacy in the Chord DAC processing that I love.

 

[Deftone]

Finally I got to audition the Chord Hugo TT. 

I was expecting to be blown away with the sound but I was let down by it completely and did not connect with my music at all. I found no clarity in the sound,there was no dynamics in the sound at all. It was just a cold listening experience. There was no separation or details in the sound. The biggest disappointment was listening to the vocals, they were just sounded so muddy to me. 

How do I best describe the listening experience?  It was a bit like I was listening to a mono sound, lacking stereo imaging.Yes the sound was clean without distortion with plenty of volume but just did not got me to engage with my music. The sound was not as such that I wanted to listen to the same track again and again, I was searching those missing details but found none of those details.

The headphones I tried with it included, Focal Utopia, Focal Elear, LCD-3, HE 1000 V2, Edition X V2, an even the low end Audioquest Nighthawk.

The source used was Windows 10 PC, using the USB cable, playing FLAC and DSD files. 

I listened to these tracks among others:

Coldplay - Birds, Up & Up, Yellow.
Eric Clapton - Lay Down Sally, Wonderful Tonight.
Michael Jackson - Human Nature, Bad, Billie Jean
Bryan Adams - Heaven, Summer of 69
The Jacksons - Shake Your Body To The Ground
Stevie Wonder - Higher Ground
Adele - Hello

Something really not right there