I think the jump from H2 to HTT2 is noticeably larger than the jump from the mojo to the H2 which was unexpected considering the law of diminishing returns.
based on my listening notes made in preparation for the change from the H2 to the HTT2 and from memory (admittedly fallible) the mojo comes very close to the H2. I don’t know how much it matters but there are only 15K taps between the mojo and H2 but a full 50K taps between the H2 and the HTT2, plus several other gizmos such as the super capacitors.
Either way I think in their respective classes they are all incredible products.
Interesting. Different users, different opinions. I have the TT2 as well and I agree on what you say about H2 to TT2. But I disagree on Mojo to H2. Not only is the improvement considerable and immediately obvious, the H2 also provides crossfeed which makes a big difference (to me). How do others feel on Mojo vs H2?
Interesting. Different users, different opinions. I have the TT2 as well and I agree on what you say about H2 to TT2. But I disagree on Mojo to H2. Not only is the improvement considerable and immediately obvious, the H2 also provides crossfeed which makes a big difference (to me). How do others feel on Mojo vs H2?
"Crossfeed is a form of digital processing that blends the left and right channels of a stereo recording to achieve a speaker-like presentation during headphone-listening."
I get your question. Some devices say they have crossfeed but the change is not that noticeable. On the H2 and TT2 the change is immediately obvious. It does exactly what the manual says and once you hear it it's hard to go back to zero crossfeed.
"Crossfeed is a form of digital processing that blends the left and right channels of a stereo recording to achieve a speaker-like presentation during headphone-listening."
I get your question. Some devices say they have crossfeed but the change is not that noticeable. On the H2 and TT2 the change is immediately obvious. It does exactly what the manual says and once you hear it it's hard to go back to zero crossfeed.
I use Neutron media player.
even at a low setting (600Hz 12dB) it just creates a central focus for vocals, which is OK, but nothing wow!
can hear lyrics better, but on orchestral music, it just takes the air out.
Interesting. Different users, different opinions. I have the TT2 as well and I agree on what you say about H2 to TT2. But I disagree on Mojo to H2. Not only is the improvement considerable and immediately obvious, the H2 also provides crossfeed which makes a big difference (to me). How do others feel on Mojo vs H2?
Interesting. Different users, different opinions. I have the TT2 as well and I agree on what you say about H2 to TT2. But I disagree on Mojo to H2. Not only is the improvement considerable and immediately obvious, the H2 also provides crossfeed which makes a big difference (to me). How do others feel on Mojo vs H2?
I'd consider the Hugo 1 in that case. smaller than H2, but way cheaper.
But considering SQ - Hugo 2 all the way.I still enjoy the Mojo, but the Hugo 2 brought more SQ gains than I had expected
I'd say 2+
I wrote this 3 months ago on the Hugo 2 thread: I've had the Mojo for about 2 years and bought the Hugo 2 a little over a month ago.
I really like the Mojo, but when I found a good deal close enough for personal pickup I took the chance to meet the seller and try the H2 with my best IEMs, the Sony IER-M9. The difference was bigger than I had expected.
The whole frequency range sounds more defined on the H2, and more even.
In comparison the Mojo has a more liquid presentation, bass is softer and slower, mids more lush and treble more fluid.
H2 adds significant texture and definition to the whole frequency range, but it's most obvious in the bass, then the treble and finally in the mids. Bass is particularly well defined and more extended. Additionally it has a bigger soundstage and more precise imaging.
The downside is that music through the H2 is more intense, it's demanding more attention, the Mojo is more relaxing.
I would emphasize the soundstage even more, the difference is really quite big.
I am enjoying both. Mojo stacked with the HiBy R3 is my real portable solution, Hugo 2 is mostly in desktop use and sometime I take it with me.
Hugo 2 is somewhat more versatile, it can drive speakers directly, work as a DAC in the Stereo. The remote control is also surprisingly useful.
Still, the Mojo is a phenomenal value, maybe even better value than the Hugo 2 and for portable use I know nothing that beats it.
I want to highlight that my comparison between the mojo and the H2 is based on my notes from critical
Listening and memory (as I clearly stated in my first post) I have never compared the two directly so I can only say these are my general impressions, nothing like A/B testing.
I would say 2-3. Noticible for sure, and significant for me, but in the way I did not like the tonality change, to a bit thinner and brighter. Some have said more like Dave, and perhaps that is technically better. Whereas Mojo is more like TT2 and Qutest.
I would say 2-3. Noticible for sure, and significant for me, but in the way I did not like the tonality change, to a bit thinner and brighter. Some have said more like Dave, and perhaps that is technically better. Whereas Mojo is more like TT2 and Qutest.
I guess it all comes down your personal preference etc. For me TT2 has been more clean and detailed than Mojo but Mojo has been a lot more relaxing from very first note while TT2 makes you focus more on the music and is not that warm while provides a lot bigger sound stage. With Qutest it is so hard to describe or compare it for me since I've been listening to it through different amps only and unless you drive your cans directly from Qutest (I know some people do it that way) it is always a question how much what you hear is a result of amp influence.
I would say 2-3. Noticible for sure, and significant for me, but in the way I did not like the tonality change, to a bit thinner and brighter. Some have said more like Dave, and perhaps that is technically better. Whereas Mojo is more like TT2 and Qutest.
It is amazing.
All these DAC's have ruler flat frequency responses, when measured with latest , most accurate test equipments - yet people from different parts of the world agree that Mojo has a little darker, warmer sound to TT2 !
Yet when tonality is measured in the lab, the diffreneces are immeasurable!
Says a lot about those lab-test aficionados who believe lab-tests are everything.
If memory serves right, I read somewhere that @Rob Watts once said, he delibereatley tuned Mojo to sound a little warmer.
I would say 2-3. Noticible for sure, and significant for me, but in the way I did not like the tonality change, to a bit thinner and brighter. Some have said more like Dave, and perhaps that is technically better. Whereas Mojo is more like TT2 and Qutest.
Thank you. I think between 2-3 on my scale is more realistic than 'night & day'.
Besides, many users have reported a preference for the warmer and thicker mids presentation on the Mojo compared to the larger soundstage but somewhat leaner and brighter presentation of the H2.
Simply put; not everybody prefers the H2.
I read countless reports that the Qutest sounds identical to the H2 which suggests that it is not on the warmer and thicker sounding side like Mojo, but i haven't compared them myself.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
