thanks for the suggestion. unfortunately the xdudo is kind hard to get. have you or anybody tried a fiio m5? that thing is tiny! but most importantly it has a coaxial output.
Chord Hugo
- Thread starter harmonix
- Start date
thanks for the suggestion. unfortunately the xdudo is kind hard to get. have you or anybody tried a fiio m5? that thing is tiny! but most importantly it has a coaxial output.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2010
- Posts
- 7,811
- Likes
- 3,058
In this week's bonus article we compare the original Hugo with its successor, the Hugo 2. Shootout time!
https://www.headfonia.com/chord-hugo-vs-hugo-2-review/
https://www.headfonia.com/chord-hugo-vs-hugo-2-review/
ruthieandjohn
Stumbling towards enlightenment
(Formerly known as kayandjohn.)
Here is my comparison of Hugo to Hugo 2 of 3-1/2 years ago.
I'm SOLD! Even Better Than Hugo(1)
Pros - Improved sound (over Hugo 1); much-improved convenience overcomes the quirks that the Hugo 1 user had to endure
Cons - Unfamiliar coax input format required jury-rigging; unit rattles, likely due to ball switches (no effect on operation)
CAVEAT! head-fi.org crashed and trashed my review when 90% in and offered no way to reconstruct. This iteration is being entered incrementally and may not be complete. Instructions give a minimum, but not a maximum, limit.
ABSTRACT
The black Chord Hugo 2 was received on loan as part of the Official Chord Hugo2 Canada/U.S.A. Tour, described here. In short... I'M SOLD! Chord has taken an exquisite product, the Hugo, improved its sound, and even more so, improved the quirkiness that Hugo owners had to endure for the pleasure of using the Hugo.
PHYSICAL/ELECTRICAL COMPARISON TO HUGO 1
The Chord Hugo 2 is very slightly larger (broader) and heavier than the Hugo 1. The following pictures compare the two Hugos.
Fig. 1: Chord Hugo 2 (black, bottom) moves many of the lights and switches scattered around the Chord Hugo 1 (silver, top) to a neat row.
Fig. 2: Chord Hugo 2 (black) is about 1/8" wider than Hugo 1 (silver) and has sharp, rather than rounded, edges and corners. Connectors on the Hugo 2 are flush with the surface of the chassis, rather than recessed as on the Hugo 1, and power is provided by a standard USB charging port on the Hugo 2, rather than a round wall wart plug.
Fig. 3: Chassis openings around the jacks on the Hugo 2 (black) provide enough clearance for most large-ended jacks, unlike the Hugo 1. Special cables are no longer needed for the Hugo 2.
Fig. 4: The Bluetooth port on the Hugo 2 (black) is larger and more sensitive than on the Hugo 1, allowing operation from across the room.
Fig. 5: The Chord Hugo 2 fits, though tightly, into the Chord Hugo case designed for the Hugo 1. Both the greater width and the raised volume control surround make the fit into the case tight.
Fig 6: The new design of the buttons/lights on the Hugo 2 allow in-case access by simply pressing the edge of the case.
There are a number of improvements in convenience that the Hugo 2 makes over the Hugo 1. Indeed, to my mind these are even more of an improvement in the Hugo design than the improved sound. The differences of the Hugo 2 include:
I have performed three types of tests:
I have used this test method many, many times on many headphones, as can be seen by the tables hereand the links to over 50 individual tests therein.
I used four songs, all encoded in Apple Lossless Format at CD quality (I actually bought the CDs and ripped them... no internet download involved) and played by my Apple iPod Touch 5th Gen. Because each of the 10 acoustic tests used a limited segment of music (2 - 10 sec), an infinite loop was used to repeat the appropriate segment of each song while DACs were switched in and out.
The table below gives a first place (blue, 3 points), second place (red, 2 points) and third place (yellow, 1 point) rating to each of the three systems compared to one another on each of the 10 tests. Just for fun (nearly meaningless, though, for supreme-level systems such as these), I added the points across all 10 tests to see which was overall highest scoring, second, and third. Since these are rank orders rather than absolute scores, and since I can make mistakes in comparison (though I tried to assure that any differences I declared were large enough that if made to repeat in a blind test, I could... hence, there is at least one feature that has a three-way tie), scores of 3 or larger are significant.
I used the HiFiMAN HE1000 as the headphone in the following test, because earlier tests of other DACs showed me that it was the most sensitive of my headphones to differences in DACs. Here is the result of comparing the Hugo 2 (center column) to the Hugo 1 (left) and iPod Touch 6 (right):
Fig. 7: Hugo 2 (center) outshines the Hugo 1 and iPod Touch 6 in areas of treble detail and sound stage; Hugo 1 and iPod Touch 6 were comparable in total score, though different in strengths.
The similarity of the iPod Touch 6 to the Hugo 1 has been the subject of multiple threads (here and here), with opinions ranging from "I can't tell the difference, either" to "I hear a clear difference on all music" (and I fear an unspoken "What's wrong with you?") .
As I am an aficionado of Grado headphones (I have over 25 pairs!), I have often talked with Grado Labs, and they have recommended both the Schiit Lyr 2 and the Lotoo PAW Gold as excellent for Grado headphones. Hence, I compared these two systems with the Hugo 2 in driving the Grado PS1000e headphone, as follows:
Fig. 8: Lotoo PAW Gold provides slightly better sound than the Hugo 2 or Schiit Bifrost Multibit / Schiit Lyr 2 for the Grado PS1000e.
BLIND TESTS
In these tests, I arranged the connections into the various systems while my wife Ruthie (of "ruthieandjohn," my screen name) listened to the pieces shown. She is consistently able to discern differences in headphones and amps better than I can. One of these was performed with the low-cost Grado SR125e ($150), the other with the high-end HiFiMAN HE1000.
Fig 9: Blind test comparison of Hugo 2 to either Hugo 1 and iPod Touch (top row) or Lotoo PAW Gold and Schiit Bimby/Lyr 2 (lower row) shows Hugo 2 excelling in sound quality.
In the test against the Hugo 1, the Hugo 2 was said to be "clearer and cleaner." Instruments seemed better separated and did not blend (thought the blending of the Hugo 1 sound was regarded as very pleasant. Even modestly-priced headphones can benefit from the Hugo 2 (of course, they ARE Grados, so what would one expect?)
In the tests vs. the Lotoo and the Schiit components, the Hugo 2 was regarded as placing the listener more into the middle of the music, which surrounded the listener more.
VARIETY TESTS
Some folks on the Hugo 2 Tour thread have expressed interest in the Audeze Sine 20 IEM. While I don't have that, I do have the highly excellent AKG K3003i IEMs, one of the best universal fit IEMs, so I performed comparisons with it between the top performing Lotoo PAW Gold and the Hugo 2. In similar vein, I compared my three top headphones, the HiFiMAN HE1000, the Sennheiser HD800, and the Grado PS1000e, using several examples of music types and playback resolutions, from the 44.1 K, 16 bit samples of lossless CD to the 192 K 24-bit samples of high resolution. Here are the results.
Fig 10: For a top-end IEM, the Hugo and the Lotoo PAW Gold work equally well. For close-mic'ed solo piano music ("Goldberg Variations"), the solo piano was just a bit more realistic with the Lotoo. The Hugo 2 outperformed the Lotoo for the Sennheiser and Grado headphones and was equal for the HiFiMAN.
SUMMARY
The Hugo 2 is a winner! Despite having close to 50 pairs of headphones, about 8 portable DACs (including the Hugo), perhaps 5 portable amps, 6 desk-sized amps, one desk-top DAC, and other associated gear, I hope to be able to purchase one in the not-too-distant future. In addition to providing the best sound I have heard from any DAC, portable or desktop, the Hugo 2 has added a supreme amount of convenience with its physical upgrades. I would be most interested in how it compares to the Schiit Yggdrasil as perhaps one of the best DACs ever.
I'm SOLD! Even Better Than Hugo(1)
Pros - Improved sound (over Hugo 1); much-improved convenience overcomes the quirks that the Hugo 1 user had to endure
Cons - Unfamiliar coax input format required jury-rigging; unit rattles, likely due to ball switches (no effect on operation)
CAVEAT! head-fi.org crashed and trashed my review when 90% in and offered no way to reconstruct. This iteration is being entered incrementally and may not be complete. Instructions give a minimum, but not a maximum, limit.
ABSTRACT
The black Chord Hugo 2 was received on loan as part of the Official Chord Hugo2 Canada/U.S.A. Tour, described here. In short... I'M SOLD! Chord has taken an exquisite product, the Hugo, improved its sound, and even more so, improved the quirkiness that Hugo owners had to endure for the pleasure of using the Hugo.
PHYSICAL/ELECTRICAL COMPARISON TO HUGO 1
The Chord Hugo 2 is very slightly larger (broader) and heavier than the Hugo 1. The following pictures compare the two Hugos.
Fig. 1: Chord Hugo 2 (black, bottom) moves many of the lights and switches scattered around the Chord Hugo 1 (silver, top) to a neat row.
Fig. 2: Chord Hugo 2 (black) is about 1/8" wider than Hugo 1 (silver) and has sharp, rather than rounded, edges and corners. Connectors on the Hugo 2 are flush with the surface of the chassis, rather than recessed as on the Hugo 1, and power is provided by a standard USB charging port on the Hugo 2, rather than a round wall wart plug.
Fig. 3: Chassis openings around the jacks on the Hugo 2 (black) provide enough clearance for most large-ended jacks, unlike the Hugo 1. Special cables are no longer needed for the Hugo 2.
Fig. 4: The Bluetooth port on the Hugo 2 (black) is larger and more sensitive than on the Hugo 1, allowing operation from across the room.
Fig. 5: The Chord Hugo 2 fits, though tightly, into the Chord Hugo case designed for the Hugo 1. Both the greater width and the raised volume control surround make the fit into the case tight.
Fig 6: The new design of the buttons/lights on the Hugo 2 allow in-case access by simply pressing the edge of the case.
There are a number of improvements in convenience that the Hugo 2 makes over the Hugo 1. Indeed, to my mind these are even more of an improvement in the Hugo design than the improved sound. The differences of the Hugo 2 include:
- Easier "On/Off" switch... a simple finger-sized button rather than a recessed microswitch requiring a fingernail;
- All jacks are at the surface of the chassis, rather than buried deep into a recess. Hence, the cables with special small ends that Hugo owners have had to buy are no longer needed for the Hugo 2;
- USB ports are inverted in position;
- Optical connector opening is covered (and not recessed);
- Volume control and its surrounding housing protrude a bit from the chassis, rather than being flush, and the volume control ball is bigger;
- Hugo 2 is 1/16" thinner, 1/8" wider, and 1.25 oz heavier (13.5 oz vs. 12.25 oz) than the Hugo 1;
- Hugo 2 has sharp corners and edges; those on Hugo 1 are rounded;
- Hugo 2 adds a four-position switch to tailor the reconstruction filter. The Hugo is known for its long reconstruction filter, said to be key to its sound, particularly for transients. The original Hugo had a filter of over 26,000 taps, while the Hugo 2 has over 49,000 taps. This switch adjusts the high frequency roll-off of the filter (little difference in sound as far as I could tell);
- Charging proceeds through a standard USB port rather than a dedicated wall wart and round plug that the Hugo 1 has;
- USB input is only one jack, combining the driverless USB (for tablets/phones) with the high-data-rate driver USB plugs on the Hugo 1;
- Coax input is unfamiliar, at least to me... instead of the standard RCA input of the Hugo 1, the Hugo 2 uses a multi-ring miniplug, and figuring out polarity from the coax output of the FiiO X5ii player used below was hard;
- Hugo 2 has a remote control, aiding its use in a desktop system;
- Hugo 2 has a charge-while-running operation and intelligent charging system, again to help use in constantly-plugged in desktop systems.
- Bluetooth receiver of the Hugo 2 is more sensitive, supporting longer-range, across-the-room usage (rather than the close-in, airplane-mode-friendly short distance of the Hugo 1).
I have performed three types of tests:
- Three-way comparison of the Hugo 2 to the Hugo 1 and iPod Touch 6 Gen, and three way comparison of the Hugo 2 to the Lotoo PAW Gold digital audio player and the Schiit Bifrost Multibit DAC with Schiit Lyr 2 amp;
- Blind test, using a second person more skilled than I in hearing subtle differences;
- Variety test, using several different headphones, music types, and bit rates to determine whether preferences of the Hugo 2 vs. the Hugo 1 maintain in the face of these changes.
- Chord Hugo 2 - $2195 (Moon Audio)
- Chord Hugo (1) - $1,995 (Moon Audio)
- Lotoo PAW Gold - $2,399 (Diane Edition - The Evolution of Sound)
- Schiit Bifrost Multibit & Lyr 2 - $1,048 (Schiit Audio)
- Apple iPod Touch Gen 6 - $399 (Apple)
I have used this test method many, many times on many headphones, as can be seen by the tables hereand the links to over 50 individual tests therein.
I used four songs, all encoded in Apple Lossless Format at CD quality (I actually bought the CDs and ripped them... no internet download involved) and played by my Apple iPod Touch 5th Gen. Because each of the 10 acoustic tests used a limited segment of music (2 - 10 sec), an infinite loop was used to repeat the appropriate segment of each song while DACs were switched in and out.
- "You're Going To Miss Me When I'm Gone," by Band of Heathens, from their album One Foot In The Ether (used for fidelity of drum sound, positional resolution of two vocalists, and ability to discern pitch of string bass passages);
- "Spanish Harlem," by Rebecca Pidgeon, on The Ultimate Demonstration Disc of Chesky records (used to assess female vocals, transparency, the attack of finger on bass string, and high resolution discrimination of differences in shaker shakes);
- "Symphony No. 3 in C Minor Op. 78 (Organ Symphony) - IV" by Camille Saint Saens played by Lorin Maazel and the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra (used to assess the "ripping" sound of well-rendered lower brass and organ reed pipes, and the ability to hear a very small entrance amidst a bombastic chord of orchestra and organ at full tilt);
- "Throwback" by B.o.B. on Underground Luxury (used to assess ability of a bass tone, specifically lowest C on piano at about 32 Hz, to pick me up by the throat and shake me!)
- Transparency: What is between me and the music? A felt cloth? A "Sennheiser veil?" A frosted window? Dirty window? Clear Saran wrap? or nothing? At its best, makes me forget I am listening on headphones and am in room with musicians. [I use the 12-second segment 0:00 - 0:12 of "You're Going To Miss Me," which is kick drum, guitar, piano, and cymbal for this test]
- Width of sound stage: How far to the left and to the right, (yes, AND up and down in best cases) does it seem the musical sources are arranged? [I use the same 0:00 - 0:12 segment of "You're Going To Miss Me," which starts with kick drum center, guitar #1 right of center piano far right, guitar #2 far left, to see 1) to what extent am I among rather than in front of the musicians, and 2) how wide an angle do those positional extremes of instruments form?]
- Positional resolution: Can I distinguish a difference in position of two singers in Song 1? [I use 0:30 to 0:38 of "You're Going To Miss Me," where one vocalist ends a verse and a second vocalist, standing next to him, takes up the next.]
- Bass visceral: Does the bass in third verse of Song 4 actually shake me? Or do I just hear it? [This test uses 0:31 through 0:33 of "Throwback, " where the bass drops to the lowest C on the piano.]
- Drum "twang": At start of Song 1, do the bass and tom tom drumhead have a tone and a pitch, rather than just a thump? ["You're Going to Miss Me" 0:00 - 0:12]
- Bass pitch perception: For the complicated bass runs in Song 1, do I hear a pitch with sufficient accuracy to sing or transcribe the part? ["You're Going to Miss Me," 1:02 - 1:23 to see if I can hear the pitch of not only the bass glides and accented notes, but also the grace notes]
- Bass finger pluck: Do I hear the actual impact of fingers on the bass string just before hearing its sound on Song 2? ["Spanish Harlem," 0:00 - 0:04, listening most carefully to the repeated 3-note pattern to see if I not only hear an initial attack but some structure immediately following, before the finger leaves the string and the sound just rings)
- Shaker variation: In Song 2, verse 3, do the various shaker shakes sound a bit different from each other, as they should? ["Spanish Harlem," 1:40 - 1:47: there are clearly loud and soft shakes, but how many more volume levels of shakes can I distinguish, and can I hear structure within each shake as the seeds hit the shaker wall?]
- "Ripping" of organ / brass: In Song 3, is there the sensation of hearing each vibration of the French horn and low organ reed tones (sort of the tonal counterpart to hearing a "pitch" from a drumhead in Test 5); ["Organ Symphony," initial chord from 0:00 - 0:04 and French horn passage 0:06 - 0:12]
- Discern added chord: About 1:38 into Song 3, after the full orchestra and organ hold a chord at the top of a passage, can I hear a small number of orchestra instruments join in, as sort of an echo, in the second measure of that chord? ["Organ Symphony," in the passage starting at 1:08, how well can I hear the small additional chord added at 1:16 on top of the full strength organ/orchestra chord in progress? Clearly enough to have noticed it if I weren't already listening for it?]
The table below gives a first place (blue, 3 points), second place (red, 2 points) and third place (yellow, 1 point) rating to each of the three systems compared to one another on each of the 10 tests. Just for fun (nearly meaningless, though, for supreme-level systems such as these), I added the points across all 10 tests to see which was overall highest scoring, second, and third. Since these are rank orders rather than absolute scores, and since I can make mistakes in comparison (though I tried to assure that any differences I declared were large enough that if made to repeat in a blind test, I could... hence, there is at least one feature that has a three-way tie), scores of 3 or larger are significant.
I used the HiFiMAN HE1000 as the headphone in the following test, because earlier tests of other DACs showed me that it was the most sensitive of my headphones to differences in DACs. Here is the result of comparing the Hugo 2 (center column) to the Hugo 1 (left) and iPod Touch 6 (right):
Fig. 7: Hugo 2 (center) outshines the Hugo 1 and iPod Touch 6 in areas of treble detail and sound stage; Hugo 1 and iPod Touch 6 were comparable in total score, though different in strengths.
The similarity of the iPod Touch 6 to the Hugo 1 has been the subject of multiple threads (here and here), with opinions ranging from "I can't tell the difference, either" to "I hear a clear difference on all music" (and I fear an unspoken "What's wrong with you?") .
As I am an aficionado of Grado headphones (I have over 25 pairs!), I have often talked with Grado Labs, and they have recommended both the Schiit Lyr 2 and the Lotoo PAW Gold as excellent for Grado headphones. Hence, I compared these two systems with the Hugo 2 in driving the Grado PS1000e headphone, as follows:
Fig. 8: Lotoo PAW Gold provides slightly better sound than the Hugo 2 or Schiit Bifrost Multibit / Schiit Lyr 2 for the Grado PS1000e.
BLIND TESTS
In these tests, I arranged the connections into the various systems while my wife Ruthie (of "ruthieandjohn," my screen name) listened to the pieces shown. She is consistently able to discern differences in headphones and amps better than I can. One of these was performed with the low-cost Grado SR125e ($150), the other with the high-end HiFiMAN HE1000.
Fig 9: Blind test comparison of Hugo 2 to either Hugo 1 and iPod Touch (top row) or Lotoo PAW Gold and Schiit Bimby/Lyr 2 (lower row) shows Hugo 2 excelling in sound quality.
In the test against the Hugo 1, the Hugo 2 was said to be "clearer and cleaner." Instruments seemed better separated and did not blend (thought the blending of the Hugo 1 sound was regarded as very pleasant. Even modestly-priced headphones can benefit from the Hugo 2 (of course, they ARE Grados, so what would one expect?)
In the tests vs. the Lotoo and the Schiit components, the Hugo 2 was regarded as placing the listener more into the middle of the music, which surrounded the listener more.
VARIETY TESTS
Some folks on the Hugo 2 Tour thread have expressed interest in the Audeze Sine 20 IEM. While I don't have that, I do have the highly excellent AKG K3003i IEMs, one of the best universal fit IEMs, so I performed comparisons with it between the top performing Lotoo PAW Gold and the Hugo 2. In similar vein, I compared my three top headphones, the HiFiMAN HE1000, the Sennheiser HD800, and the Grado PS1000e, using several examples of music types and playback resolutions, from the 44.1 K, 16 bit samples of lossless CD to the 192 K 24-bit samples of high resolution. Here are the results.
Fig 10: For a top-end IEM, the Hugo and the Lotoo PAW Gold work equally well. For close-mic'ed solo piano music ("Goldberg Variations"), the solo piano was just a bit more realistic with the Lotoo. The Hugo 2 outperformed the Lotoo for the Sennheiser and Grado headphones and was equal for the HiFiMAN.
SUMMARY
The Hugo 2 is a winner! Despite having close to 50 pairs of headphones, about 8 portable DACs (including the Hugo), perhaps 5 portable amps, 6 desk-sized amps, one desk-top DAC, and other associated gear, I hope to be able to purchase one in the not-too-distant future. In addition to providing the best sound I have heard from any DAC, portable or desktop, the Hugo 2 has added a supreme amount of convenience with its physical upgrades. I would be most interested in how it compares to the Schiit Yggdrasil as perhaps one of the best DACs ever.
Last edited:
Excellent. Now i went from hugo 2 to hugo TT2 +mscaler!!
The RCA inputs are broken because of the tight cable on my Hugo. I want to change them but don't know how to get the board out of the body. Someone who disassembled can tell how to get it out without breaking the buttons on the right?
It's a very tight fit, needs to be done gently and carefully.
1. Unscrew the four screws that keep the board in place inside the enclosure (screws close to the corners).
2. You can gently push the board to the side of the RCAs, to get 1-2 mm of gap on the button's side.
3. Use something like a toothpick to press the buttons and make them go stuck up behind the enclosure, just a little bit so they wont hang inside the holes.
4. Gently start rising the button's side of the board.
When you put the board back in, RCA side goes first.
1. Unscrew the four screws that keep the board in place inside the enclosure (screws close to the corners).
2. You can gently push the board to the side of the RCAs, to get 1-2 mm of gap on the button's side.
3. Use something like a toothpick to press the buttons and make them go stuck up behind the enclosure, just a little bit so they wont hang inside the holes.
4. Gently start rising the button's side of the board.
When you put the board back in, RCA side goes first.
Thanks for reply. I tried to do as you wrote but afraid to break something. I'll try again carefully
uzi2
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2013
- Posts
- 1,638
- Likes
- 478
Does Sygnalist HQPlayer make any sense with the original Hugo with the limit of 352.8k / 384k?
montanari
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2012
- Posts
- 1,126
- Likes
- 277
I use it and I prefer it over other players
uzi2
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2013
- Posts
- 1,638
- Likes
- 478
Thanks. What are your preferred settings?
montanari
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2012
- Posts
- 1,126
- Likes
- 277
The filter xtr
Since it s just pcm 384 easy to play without - 2s
Since it s just pcm 384 easy to play without - 2s
Hej, rookie question. I'm looking into this one to use with my laptop (being a consultant running around makes me fall for the portability of this one). I was wondering if it can be run using power from the laptop using an USB to DC cable? (means I don't have to carry the charger, look for an additional socket and don't have to think about overnight charging).
Only the Hugo2 can charge from USB. Hugo1 is wall wart only.
It happened. My Hugo died.
I was listening to a new set of 64 Audio Tia Fourte's on Saturday. Sunday when I plugged in my AK, the HD input wouldn't connect. I tried a bunch of different sources, it was dead.
I took it to our local Chord repair-- sadly the only way to fix it is to replace the main board. $700-$800 dollars after labor. The part itself is over $500. There are Hugos for sale for $700 that aren't selling right now.
It's totaled. Not worth the investment to fix it.
Where to go from here....
I was listening to a new set of 64 Audio Tia Fourte's on Saturday. Sunday when I plugged in my AK, the HD input wouldn't connect. I tried a bunch of different sources, it was dead.
I took it to our local Chord repair-- sadly the only way to fix it is to replace the main board. $700-$800 dollars after labor. The part itself is over $500. There are Hugos for sale for $700 that aren't selling right now.
It's totaled. Not worth the investment to fix it.
Where to go from here....
Users who are viewing this thread
