[Sound Eq]

sorry if i did not follow up is there going to be  a new product from chord that is portable and what is it

 

[estreeter]

Hugo is the best portable DAC , now to see how it stacks against the heavy hitting desktop dacs

 
Let's not go there deuter - I know you're new here, but the Hugo has ruffled quite a few feathers. Even in the portable space, the guys with the iDSD micro claim they prefer that sound sig - horses for courses. 

 

[audionewbi]

I suppose it comes down to what is hugo i getting paired with. 
 
I have spend a long time testing the different digital input on HUGO and I prefer the optical a lot more than USB. I think coaxial is the detail oriented, optical provides more dynamic and warmth and USB is a touch on the cold side.
 
It does not make sense and a year ago I would laugh at the comment I have made above but that is my take on it. If I could find a trust worth portable optical source for HUGO I would be a very happy person.
 
I am also awaiting for my case to arrive, looking forward to that too. 

 

[Sound Eq]

   
Let's not go there deuter - I know you're new here, but the Hugo has ruffled quite a few feathers. Even in the portable space, the guys with the iDSD micro claim they prefer that sound sig - horses for courses. 

u mean they prefer the idsd

 

[estreeter]

 
u mean they prefer the idsd

 
3 very different products all bearing the iDSD nomenclature:
 
http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-idsd/
 
http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/nano-idsd/
 
http://www.stereophile.com/content/ifi-idsd-mini-dac
 
There is an extensive thread on the micro on CA and another here. 

 

[SearchOfSub]

I prefer PCM over DSD on Hugo. The few that didn't like Hugo were DSD users. I don't think anything can touch Hugo in terms of PCM.

 

[Benmor]

yes Lockeray, the usb input broke off for me too. I'd only had the Hugo for a few weeks when it happened. The retailer replaced it almost immediately.

 

[estreeter]

I prefer PCM over DSD on Hugo. The few that didn't like Hugo were DSD users. I don't think anything can touch Hugo in terms of PCM.

 
Until you've heard the competition, I'd keep a lid on that, Forget the reviews, forget the hype in this thread - get out and listen to as much gear between 1500 and 5k as you can before sharing those thoughts. I enjoy the hell out of my Hugo but I'm also enjoying the hell out of another source atm - roughly the same price as Hugo but much more flexible in everything bar bluetooth connectivity and a genuine 'standalone' source. Granted, getting it into a backpack could take some doing, but if we are seriously going to pit the Hugo against desktop competitors that's a moot point. I havent seen a single comparison between the Hugo and the Sony HAP-Z1ES but the latter is actually cheaper - again, if we're serious in making these claims we need to make it clear what the competition is. If you believe the magazines, it could be anything up to 10K - I'm keeping an open mind re that kind of talk. 
 
Over to you, 

 

[ted_b]

I've had both a stock and modded Sony HApz1ES inhouse.  Neither are anything even remotely close to the sophisticated musicality of the Hugo, IMHO.  They disappointed me in all sample rates, especially the extremes (redbook and DSD).   They are a huge miss by Sony, IMO.  And I am continued to be blown away by reports that the Hugo is thin and lightweight in its sonics.   In my system, the Hugo is entirely fleshed out and extremely robust and ballsy (when needed).  I think folks who report thisthinness are using it direct and have it set incorrectly (i.e are not driving their downstream correctly, likely too little).  For me I have it set at 3V RMS and driving either a Concert Fidelity preamp or a Backert Rythm 1.1, into a pair of Modwright KWA 150 monoblocks (also demoing a pair of Pass .8's).

 

[estreeter]

Why torture yourself, Ted - you know you want the NA11S1  

 
http://www.stereophile.com/content/marantz-reference-na-11s1-network-audio-playerdac
 
While I dont know that Chord needed quite the same heavy-duty casework for the Hugo, I have to ask if many of us would have been happier with the real estate dedicated to inputs and outputs. Those of us who own it ceased to notice the aesthetics months ago but it's clear that there are some in this hobby who never quite got over the visuals and I've never forgiven Chord for the recessed USB slots. 
 

 

 
For the younger members of Head-Fi, this might be as stark a contrast as one could hope for between the past and the future of hi-fi sources - let's hope the industry is clever enough to continue to make both camps happy. 

 

[Kakki]

Someone tried Olimex USB-ISO with iPhone5s on Hugo?
 
I got Olimex USB-ISO and did listening tests for hours with iPhone5s and also with coax input from my Akurate DS.
So the tests went as follows.
 
1. iPhone5s + Hugo + B&W 805 Diamond
2. iPhone5s + USB-ISO + Hugo + B&W 805 Diamond
3. Akurate DS Coax Out + Hugo + B&W 805 Diamond
 
They were very close in the SQ and I could hardly hear the difference.
 
The one had the deepest sound stage with most details was #3. Akurate DS Coax input to Hugo.
For #1 and #2, I initially expected that #2 sounds better... but after hours of comparison, I concluded that #1 option sounds better... with deeper sound stage and with more details, and with darker background.
 
I'm a bit confused by the result but I would suspect that USB-ISO could not add benefits to iPhone5s since iPhone5s is a battery operated source.
I also would suspect that USB-ISO generates some noises itself.
 
I would welcome your comments and similar test results.
 
Rob, I would really appreciate if you would let me know of your thoughts on this. Am I aligned with what is theoretically correct or am I hearing something wrong?

 

[SearchOfSub]

Not sure if there were reports of this but after some testing, I am pretty sure the Hugo gains more dynamics and power with the charger plugged in vs. out.

 

[Rob Watts]

  Someone tried Olimex USB-ISO with iPhone5s on Hugo?
 
I got Olimex USB-ISO and did listening tests for hours with iPhone5s and also with coax input from my Akurate DS.
So the tests went as follows.
 
1. iPhone5s + Hugo + B&W 805 Diamond
2. iPhone5s + USB-ISO + Hugo + B&W 805 Diamond
3. Akurate DS Coax Out + Hugo + B&W 805 Diamond
 
They were very close in the SQ and I could hardly hear the difference.
 
The one had the deepest sound stage with most details was #3. Akurate DS Coax input to Hugo.
For #1 and #2, I initially expected that #2 sounds better... but after hours of comparison, I concluded that #1 option sounds better... with deeper sound stage and with more details, and with darker background.
 
I'm a bit confused by the result but I would suspect that USB-ISO could not add benefits to iPhone5s since iPhone5s is a battery operated source.
I also would suspect that USB-ISO generates some noises itself.
 
I would welcome your comments and similar test results.
 
Rob, I would really appreciate if you would let me know of your thoughts on this. Am I aligned with what is theoretically correct or am I hearing something wrong?

 
My tests with the Olimex was with a Dell Intel i7 Win8 machine, and that will be a lot more noisy than an iPhone5, as we are talking about 100 times more power being dissipated in the Dell compared to the iPhone. So its very good news that the iPhone does not need isolation and your explanation from #1 to #2 makes sense. I am not familiar with #3, so can't comment.
 
As to you hearing things correctly - some people report things as sounding better, when in fact they are enjoying distortion. It is very easy in this game to actually go down the wrong path. But if its smoother, with better sound stage depth, then this is hallmarks of lower RF noise and lower correlated (but distorted) noise. And in the case of the digital inputs, as source jitter is eliminated within Hugo, the only mechanism that can upset the sound is RF noise and correlated noise being injected into Hugo's ground plane. So if a change in this case is smoother, it is fundamentally more transparent and you are on the right path.
 
This illustrates how complex this game is, and how amazing the ear/brain is at detecting miniscule errors.
 
Rob

 

[Kakki]

Rob, thank you for your comments!
 
In the hearing test, the differences were very small and I was not so confident that I could identify each of the source when doing blind tests.
I kept listening to the same music many times and concentrated to identify the differences of the depth of the sound stage and how silent the background was.
 
About the Coax and USB input for Hugo, in the RF noise perspective and the noise into the ground plane perspective, is there any difference?
I know that usual HiFi systems (not portable one) has pulse-transformer type of isolator for Coax inputs... but I don't know if this is the case with Hugo.
 
Would appreciate your comments as always.

 

[Rob Watts]

  Rob, thank you for your comments!
 
In the hearing test, the differences were very small and I was not so confident that I could identify each of the source when doing blind tests.
I kept listening to the same music many times and concentrated to identify the differences of the depth of the sound stage and how silent the background was.
 
About the Coax and USB input for Hugo, in the RF noise perspective and the noise into the ground plane perspective, is there any difference?
I know that usual HiFi systems (not portable one) has pulse-transformer type of isolator for Coax inputs... but I don't know if this is the case with Hugo.
 
Would appreciate your comments as always.

Yes we are talking small changes here. My usual protocol (for when I am listening to say something really small like the internals of noise shapers for example) is to use 30 seconds over and over again. I have 3 tracks I use - one for depth, one for separation, timbre and vocal, and another for really complex busy music. Sometimes, I have done hundreds of listening tests just on one Verilog module (a Verilog module is a section of code that will do a particular function within the FPGA design) . The listening tests on the new QBD took 2 months just on the noise shapers alone. I don't usually do it blind - except for when I am hearing something extraordinary, something that makes no sense, then I will do single blind listening tests in order to confirm something really unusual. 
 
I don't use the usual transformers on the Coax inputs, as they are too slow and the SPDIF can run at 384kHz. Also the capacitive coupling on these transformers don't provide much RF isolation.
 
Rob