[Mython]

Sorry. I was trying to say that the charging circuit had sensed a fault rather than imply that it had a fault.

Yes, I interpreted your comment to mean that the charging circuit was not charging as intended (as would be the case, if insufficient charging current was being supplied to Mojo), rather than the circuit actually having a technical hardware fault.

However, others, less familiar with Mojo, might misconstrue your intended meaning.

Semantics can be a fickle mistress!


Therefore, not to reduce the legitimacy of Greenbow's later clarification, but, purely to avoid any confusion to new Mojo owners who may read your original remark, it might be helpful to go back and edit your original post, in order to make your intended meaning clearer to anyone newcomers reading it.

 

[rbalcom]

Good suggestion. Edit made and hopefully made it better.

 

[Trapok]

The whole point of Mojo is that there are actually no good dac/amp chips available; they all, by comparison to Mojo, perform poorly both measurement and sound quality wise. No other non Chord DAC reconstructs transients as accurately as Mojo - and that's down to Mojo's processing power (500x more powerful) and the use of the WTA algorithm. Also, no other non Chord DAC (at any price) has Mojo's zero measured noise floor modulation (and this is the reason for Mojo's natural warmth and refinement). No other non Chord DAC has the analogue simplicity of a single high power discrete OP stage with only one amplifier in the signal path - and this single amp topology gives Mojo's transparency.

Rob

Thanks for your answer.

What i understand is is that buying an hi-end DAP and pairing it with a MOJO is a nonsens as the DAP will be used as transport only.
Am i right?
(Unless you already have it)

 

[earwego]

Am I right in saying that the Chord Mojo is totally immune to the quality of the source/transport (if at least half-decent) - like for instance - if I use the simple little Google Chromecast Audio via its toslink? I am close to spending good money on an sMS-200 Ultra which is renowned as an excellent source (a 'game changer' some say) - but if Chord DACs do not respond (due to they way they are specifically designed) to the higher end quality transport with femto clocks then I may as well stick with the CCA! (Or perhaps I 'may' upgrade to the Aries Mini simply because of the UI).

Additional do this, does the Mojo respond to high quality linear power supplies?

There's so much talk about money spent upstream of the DAC int terms of transport and PSU, if however this is certainly unnecessary "for sure", the CCA does everything I need it to.

 

[musickid]

with optical does mojo fully reclock the incoming signal so it is in effect in full control of timing as if you were using the usb input? i know other dacs can become slave to the sources clock if not using asynchrous usb input. i think dave does reclock all incoming signals regardless of input type using DPLL as far as i understand? is mojo the same?

 

[Rob Watts]

Yes Mojo is the same as Dave and Hugo 2 - they all have the identical DPLL.

As far as linear PSU's go, when I plug in Mojo's charger, I can measure absolutely no change - but much more importantly (as we can hear what can't be measured) I can't hear any change. Of course, if you are using Mojo as a DAC feeding a power amp, you may hear differently, as some power amps are very sensitive to other PSU's, and the mains power in general.

As far as sources go, if it is bit perfect, than Mojo is pretty much insensitive to the quality of the source - certainly completely insensitive to source jitter. Optical will be the best SQ, and with a good source USB will match optical sound quality.

 

[earwego]

Yes Mojo is the same as Dave and Hugo 2 - they all have the identical DPLL.

As far as linear PSU's go, when I plug in Mojo's charger, I can measure absolutely no change - but much more importantly (as we can hear what can't be measured) I can't hear any change. Of course, if you are using Mojo as a DAC feeding a power amp, you may hear differently, as some power amps are very sensitive to other PSU's, and the mains power in general.

As far as sources go, if it is bit perfect, than Mojo is pretty much insensitive to the quality of the source - certainly completely insensitive to source jitter. Optical will be the best SQ, and with a good source USB will match optical sound quality.

Well this is VERY important to me. I've been chasing the idea that a high quality transport such as the sMS-200 Ultra's are "superb" - but why spend money on one when - in terms of the Chord Mojo at least - it won't make a blind bit of difference between using a lowly (but competent) CCA or a souped up sMS-200.

However if this is true (which is excellent btw) then I will be locked into using Chord DACs because these are perhaps the only DACs on the market that do not upgrade their performance with better upstream foundation. I would like the Chord 2Qute, but 3V output just seems a little high - I can of course see if that is the case.

Point is conclusively - the CCA is as good as any front end transport 'irrespective of price' when tethered to a Chord!!

 

[musickid]

thanks for the clarification there. mk

 

[miketlse]

Well this is VERY important to me. I've been chasing the idea that a high quality transport such as the sMS-200 Ultra's are "superb" - but why spend money on one when - in terms of the Chord Mojo at least - it won't make a blind bit of difference between using a lowly (but competent) CCA or a souped up sMS-200.

However if this is true (which is excellent btw) then I will be locked into using Chord DACs because these are perhaps the only DACs on the market that do not upgrade their performance with better upstream foundation. I would like the Chord 2Qute, but 3V output just seems a little high - I can of course see if that is the case.

Point is conclusively - the CCA is as good as any front end transport 'irrespective of price' when tethered to a Chord!!

Mojo is not entirely immune to source quality, see post https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cho...n-3rd-post-◄★☆.784602/page-2238#post-13681386
Optical will produce a very clear sound output, but usb can be impacted by RFI or electrical noise generated internally by the source phone, laptop etc. Even a cheap DAP like a shanling, produces a good quality usb source. I have not heard poly, so cannot say if it is much better, although there are a number of owners posting that the sound quality is outstanding.

 

[jarnopp]

Well this is VERY important to me. I've been chasing the idea that a high quality transport such as the sMS-200 Ultra's are "superb" - but why spend money on one when - in terms of the Chord Mojo at least - it won't make a blind bit of difference between using a lowly (but competent) CCA or a souped up sMS-200.

However if this is true (which is excellent btw) then I will be locked into using Chord DACs because these are perhaps the only DACs on the market that do not upgrade their performance with better upstream foundation. I would like the Chord, but 3V output just seems a little high - I can of course see if that is the case.

Point is conclusively - the CCA is as good as any front end transport 'irrespective of price' when tethered to a Chord!!

I would agree that bit perfect sources probably don’t matter or affect the Mojo, but that is not to say that different DACs will all sound the same. There is the very real problem of getting the bit perfect stream from device A to Mojo, and RFI and other noise transmitted by the connection can be (very) detrimental. That is why optical is suggested as the best input, because it doesn’t transmit any of this noise. But it had to support your use case, which would be mostly desktop use and l8mited sample rates. The Chord Poly, although USB, does not seem to suffer these noises either and many Poly owners, myself included, feel it’s the best way to feed Mojo, especially if you are streaming from Roon. It’s also quite portable.

 

[earwego]

I would agree that bit perfect sources probably don’t matter or affect the Mojo, but that is not to say that different DACs will all sound the same. There is the very real problem of getting the bit perfect stream from device A to Mojo, and RFI and other noise transmitted by the connection can be (very) detrimental. That is why optical is suggested as the best input, because it doesn’t transmit any of this noise. But it had to support your use case, which would be mostly desktop use and l8mited sample rates. The Chord Poly, although USB, does not seem to suffer these noises either and many Poly owners, myself included, feel it’s the best way to feed Mojo, especially if you are streaming from Roon. It’s also quite portable.

Yes I was looking at that combo (Mojo+Poly) for the ultimate streaming solution for Tidal - the other alternative is Aries Mini (or full blown Aries) to the Chord Mojo - because at least you have Tidal built into the AURALiC products. Introducing Roon means adding expense on the software and also needing to optimise the computer that Roon is running from.

Actually come to think of it, why would I need the Chord Poly if the CCA is already streaming Tidal just fine, without the CCA influencing the SQ in a negative way on the Mojo? If all I do is stream Tidal - surely it's a waste of money for me (as I don't stream over UPnP for example). Looking online - Chromecast Audio will be supported soon - but I already have the casting function on the CCA. So in conclusion, no benefit for me bolting on a Poly!?

 

[jarnopp]

Yes I was looking at that combo (Mojo+Poly) for the ultimate streaming solution for Tidal - the other alternative is Aries Mini (or full blown Aries) to the Chord Mojo - because at least you have Tidal built into the AURALiC products. Introducing Roon means adding expense on the software and also needing to optimise the computer that Roon is running from.

Actually come to think of it, why would I need the Chord Poly if the CCA is already streaming Tidal just fine, without the CCA influencing the SQ in a negative way on the Mojo? If all I do is stream Tidal - surely it's a waste of money for me (as I don't stream over UPnP for example). Looking online - Chromecast Audio will be supported soon - but I already have the casting function on the CCA. So in conclusion, no benefit for me bolting on a Poly!?

The phone introduces quite a bit of noise via the CCK/USB cable connection. Also, it may not be worth it just for form factor, but freeing the phone from the Mojo has been life-changing for me in terms of convenience.

 

[jooonnn]

I'm still having a ton of issues with iOS 11 with the chord mojo on my iPhone X. I keep getting a 'accessory not supported by this iphone' error. It happens when the CCK alone is plugged in, even without my mojo OR my dragonfly red.

I am pretty certain the latest update nuked the apple CCK if you look at the reviews of the cable currently.

Oh apple

 

[Light - Man]

I'm still having a ton of issues with iOS 11 with the chord mojo on my iPhone X. I keep getting a 'accessory not supported by this iphone' error. It happens when the CCK alone is plugged in, even without my mojo OR my dragonfly red.

I am pretty certain the latest update nuked the apple CCK if you look at the reviews of the cable currently.

Oh apple

Can you Apple dudes not go back to factory settings or is something so simple and straightforward not available?

Of course back up all data before trying anything (especially old girlfriend phone numbers - just in case )

 

[musickid]

earwego i personally would not use an aries mini or aries as a source as its connected to the mains and can cause trouble. as reiterated optical is best followed by a battery powered laptop next for usb. remember the money needs to go on good cables/high quality headphone after mojo. the headphone will make the biggest difference not all this other nonsense. i'm using flagship oppo pm1 with mojo with stunning results and optical to imac/roon. keep it simple. mr speaker aeon highly recommended too.

its apple hardware lightman AFAIK.