[Clemmaster]

  It's not an isolator, it's a power source and filter for 5V USB power.  Sometimes Schiit takes them selves too unseriously.  To call this an isolator is a mistake, and they even mention it in the self-deprecating description/specs:
What about galvanic isolation?
When you talk about galvanic isolation, you’re talking about USB 1.1. There is no galvanic isolation that works at full USB 2.0 speed (480Mbps). 
 
Wait, what?
Oh, you haven’t heard this? Funny how the buzzwords change. There was recently an AES paper about galvanic isolation at full USB 2.0 speed, but there are no commercially available solutions for it. Don’t worry, when and if it’s ever available, we’ll make sure we’re fully buzzword compliant.
 
This thing is a $99 filter and somewhat upgraded 5V source, an iFi Power without the dual outputs.  Not bad I'm sure....just not a galvanic isolator.

Thanks for the heads-up.
 
That leaves us with the USB3 fibre cable as a galvanic isolator. Should get mine today, as well as the Wyrd.

 

[obsidyen]

In contrast, I absolutely love the Chord Hugo and think it's the best portable DAC/Amp.

I too think that it's the best portable dac/amp. It's certainly better than any Sabre based dac/amp whether it be portable or desktop. That said, I said it's a good dac (not just good portable dac, I would have said the best portable dac instead) because I've heard much better dacs (such as Meridian 808.5 which in my opinion has an unmatched musicality).

 

[ALRAINBOW]

We think alike. Does this scare U.
Al

 

[obsidyen]

You talkin' to me? (Taxi Driver scene)
 
No, why would it scare me? It's a good thing because you know about this stuff.

 

[elviscaprice]

  I too think that it's the best portable dac/amp. It's certainly better than any Sabre based dac/amp whether it be portable or desktop. That said, I said it's a good dac (not just good portable dac, I would have said the best portable dac instead) because I've heard much better dacs (such as Meridian 808.5 which in my opinion has an unmatched musicality).

I take it you meant to say best DAC, besides best portable DAC?  That's funny, it took a $20 grand CD player to upend the Chords sound at $2350. 

 

[obsidyen]

 
I take it you meant to say best DAC, besides best portable DAC?  That's funny, it took a $20 grand CD player to upend the Chords sound at $2350. 

I meant: The best portable dac, and much better than most desktop dacs.
 
Well, there's the law of diminishing returns so...

 

[AGB100]

Doesn't the light harmonic davinci use ess chips? I haven't heard anyone trying to say the hugo is anywhere near the level of the davinci. Lots of different implementations of ess chips. Personally I think there isn't inherently anything wrong with ess chips. There is a reason why they took over the market. But I think dacs using same dac chips get voiced similarly. As I have been playing with ess dacs for a while now, I find little reason/excitement in finding another ess implementation. Hence my interest in dacs like hugo, lamp, msb, ps audio, etc. The chances for a real jump in performance is more likely. However don't interprete this as saying that the ess chips are bad. Ess has boat loads of ridiculously talented engineers and I would guess several times (if not 50 times) the engineering capability of someone like a chord. The ess is voiced in a certain way and is designed to meet a mass market which makes it suffer from the need to appeal to everyone or sound bad to least amount of people issue at correct price/performance. The reality is that ess is big enough that they could do similar high tap count implementations in hard coded silicon which would be more capable than their FPGA cousins and anything chord could do. The recent FPGA improvements have only narrowed the gap. But maybe it wouldn't be immediately appealing or be too expensive or whatever or they are stuck in different paradigm. Rob watts has lots of unique experience with his innovations around taps, but if ess thought putting in 2-4x of taps was worth it, they could do it relatively short order.

I think we're missing the big picture.
 
A DAC is a computer. So is an iPhone. So was the Motorola flip phone. Can we say the iPhone is several orders of magnitudes superior to a 15 year old Motorola RAZOR?
 
We can. In a similar fashion as a computer, the Hugo is far more sophisticated and capable than any off the shelf chip DAC regardless the price.
 
That capability can be heard by most people.
 
You may see disbelief and horror on the faces of the competition contemplating what CHORD had offered the public and the challenge they had posed to the industry.
 
There is no logical or technical reason that a $30,000 dac using Sabre chips is superior to a $2400 dac using an audibly and possibly measurably better technology.
 
There is no reason to suggest that amp A costing $1800 cannot be better than amp B costing $18,000.
 
There is no reason to think that a heavy chassis, a toroidal transformer the width of a dinner plate surrounded by electrolylitics the size of vodka bottles create a superior amplifier, no matter how much anodizing was done to its chassis.
 
All these products are first created on hard wired breadboards and computer layouts and fitted into a common black box.
 
OBSYDIAN above had stated it correctly when he said:
 
"Sabre Dacs are like McDonalds. Hugo's FPGA is like a restaurant with Michelin stars. Sabre dacs have much more money, more employees but in the end you eat frozen weird stuff. There's a reason why iFi audio, offshoot of AMR, prefer Burr Brown over Sabre chips in their most recent products (iDSD Micro, Mini). People asked and they responded saying they couldn't get the natural, organic sound with Sabre chips."

 

[ALRAINBOW]

I have to agree. So where does thus leave sabre ?
Al

 

[AGB100]

   
I'm looking to upgrade my IEM's so I'm interested in a couple of totl brands, FitEar, Translucent & the SE846's.... I know how good the Hugo sounds, my ears have been nagging me to get one ever since I demo'ed it.

I'm a little concerned with a preference for IEMs on many threads. The fact is, no IEM in my experience comes close to the best orthodynamic headphones available. OK, for road-only use the IEMs may be a better choice. For home, desktop, not close. The best headphones are significantly more satisfying and provide far less listener's fatigue, ending in a more satisfying user experience.

 

[ALRAINBOW]

That two Ina row I think I like you more now.
Al

 

[AGB100]

That two Ina row I think I like you more now.
Al

Glad I have one friend. No one else likes me.

 

[ALRAINBOW]

The truth hurts and few want to read about it. I keep saying that CIEM,s do not give the kind of resolution or details to make good judgements on equipment and I get bashed for it. It's not that the hugo does not sound really good with headphones or CIEM s but headphones just give us more about the device then any CIEM can .
Keep.ostimg I will,read it .
Al

 

[SilverEars]

I personally prefer headphones if I am in a quiet setting(but, currently I don't have a dead quite room dedicated for listening), but it would have to be my HE-6 though a big o amp that can drive it well.  I will be trying out the HD800 soon so hold your butts!  
 
In regards to iems, I prefer it for the isolation it provides, and the isolation is very important to keep the ambiant noise down.  The iems space is vast, and even the TOTL now have so much flavors to choose from. You cannot really conclude wholy based on hand full of iems that is tried as possibilities are there for the next one.  Even the CIEM space is pretty congest now, and it will get more so.  The iem tech is only going to get better.  If you hear the better CIEMs, they can really show looks can be deceiving.  There are ciems that will make you favor it over cans now.  This is good as they are easily driven, and you can have quality audio at places you can't lug your cans setup around.  When you hear some CIEMs, clarity and details with the lowest levels of ambiant noise with it's passive isolation, it's quite remarkable.
 
I disagree, if you have the right CIEMs, you can judge resolution and details.  I have one right now and can detect characteristics of the DAC chips.  I personally don't think with cans I can decern it.  Think about how sensitive the iems are vs cans.  I would suspect sensitivity would help at measuring audible performance.

 

[ALRAINBOW]

CIEM,s headphones speakers. And only speakers gives you the ambience in recordings. As I em,s have there purpose they do not give the kind of details a headphone can and the same goes for speakers. I have a few top level CIEM s and 11 pairs i total . I have about six sets of headphones there is no way they are not above them . And I have three sets of speakers and they are above all the rest. It's not that you cannot judge with them it's that you should not judge with them as they only show certain details even though they close out the noise. I use them daily on the trains but if I could I would be using headphones .
Al

 

[estreeter]

 
Glad I have one friend. No one else likes me.

 
I dont know that that's accurate - self-effacing humor notwithstanding - but you remind me of a guy on Audiokarma. He's equally passionate about this hobby but woe betide anyone who doesnt believe that Audio Note electronics married to (expensive) fullrange speakers isnt the end-game combination. I'm all for people with strong convictions but it can wear you down, particularly when he is a member of several audio forums and he keeps beating the same drum on each of them. He's also a reviewer, but I havent read a single review that doesnt read like an advertorial for AN even when the subject of the review is a competing product - at least you acknowledge that someone else is making electronics