Chord Mojo(1) DAC-amp ☆★►FAQ in 3rd post!◄★☆

[miketlse]

  Does anyone know why line level mode is set to 3V output? This is quite high. Today i have been using my Mojo to feed my Pure Jongo T2 speaker through the aux input, and when I set the Mojo to line level mode the Jongo sounds distorted even at low volumes and I need to reduce the level on the Mojo.

 
It is all explained in post #3.
 
Selecting line out is just a short cut to 3V. You can then adjust the 3V using the volume buttons as normal - i think 3v and then 4 presses of the -ve ball, will get you to 1.9V (but check post #3 to be safe).

 

[x RELIC x]

Yes, 4 clicks down is 1.9V.

 

[jmills8]

I disagree.  But everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  As far as the mojo I find it very good with the HD800.  I have owned some high end dacs and amps so I do have a reference.
As far as the HD800 it is reference quality  .  What you send through it is what you get.  The HD800 doesn't color the music like the LCD-X and LCD 2 I owned.   

Really depends on your music style. Yes soft vocals it excells. Jazz it does well. It falls short on other styles of music. Certain styles of music requires "color".

 

[Vigrith]

Really depends on your music style. Yes soft vocals it excells. Jazz it does well. It falls short on other styles of music. Certain styles of music requires "color".

 
Falls short as opposed to what? Not trying to contest your opinion, I'm just curious what you're taking as reference point.

 

[x RELIC x]

I disagree.  But everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  As far as the mojo I find it very good with the HD800.  I have owned some high end dacs and amps so I do have a reference.
As far as the HD800 it is reference quality  .  What you send through it is what you get.  The HD800 doesn't color the music like the LCD-X and LCD 2 I owned.   

It's an old headphone debate that really doesn't belong in the Mojo thread. Some would say the HD800's obvious peak in the 6K region is a serious treble coloration. It all depends on your preferences and previous point of reference.

 

[shultzee]

 

I disagree.  But everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  As far as the mojo I find it very good with the HD800.  I have owned some high end dacs and amps so I do have a reference.
As far as the HD800 it is reference quality  .  What you send through it is what you get.  The HD800 doesn't color the music like the LCD-X and LCD 2 I owned.   

It's an old headphone debate that really doesn't belong in the Mojo thread. Some would say the HD800's obvious peak in the 6K region is a serious treble coloration. It all depends on your preferences and previous point of reference.

It does belong here.  Search of Sub said he had a HD800 coming to use with Mojo.   He was told by another poster "it lacks bass"  .  
IMHO again  I find the mojo to be very good with the HD800.

 

[x RELIC x]

It does belong here.  Search of Sub said he had a HD800 coming to use with Mojo.   He was told by another poster "it lacks bass"  .  
IMHO again  I find the mojo to be very good with the HD800.

Yes, I read the conversation. I was referring to the debate of which headphone is coloured vs another. THAT will be a guaranteed thread de-rail.

 

[shultzee]

 

It does belong here.  Search of Sub said he had a HD800 coming to use with Mojo.   He was told by another poster "it lacks bass"  .  
IMHO again  I find the mojo to be very good with the HD800.

Yes, I read the conversation. I was referring to the debate of which headphone is coloured vs another. THAT will be a guaranteed thread de-rail.

Fair enough 

 

[maxh22]

I was browsing on Youtube and found a short video of John Franks introducing Mojo. He got to the tap length part and unfortunately did not give it away. He said it has "many many thousands of taps" on another video he said  it has "a similar number of taps as Hugo". I'm still trying to figure out if it's less, more, or the same. Objectively, Mojo has better THD and 5db higher dynamic range. I'm also wondering if the tunning of the WTA filter resulted in less processing power within the FPGA? It would be very interesting to have a silver or white Mojo tuned to sound like Hugo at the same price point. 
 
 

 

[Torq]

  I was browsing on Youtube and found a short video of John Franks introducing Mojo. He got to the tap length part and unfortunately did not give it away. He said it has "many many thousands of taps" on another video he said  it has "a similar number of taps as Hugo". I'm still trying to figure out if it's less, more, or the same. Objectively, Mojo has better THD and 5db higher dynamic range. I'm also wondering if the tunning of the WTA filter resulted in less processing power within the FPGA? It would be very interesting to have a silver or white Mojo tuned to sound like Hugo at the same price point. 
 
 

26,000 taps is the closest to a definitive statement as I've read ... the same as I've seen specified for Hugo.
 
I'm sure it's called out earlier in the thread, just going from memory as I'm far too lazy to search for it!

 

[maxh22]

 
26,000 taps is the closest to a definitive statement as I've read ... the same as I've seen specified for Hugo.
 
I'm sure it's called out earlier in the thread, just going from memory as I'm far too lazy to search for it!

I was looking for quite a while and couldn't find a definitive answer, only vague close estimate responses. Anyways, I'm thinking it would be great to have two flavors of Mojo (Like Vanilla and Chocolate) as some may prefer one over another. Many will say that Hugo sounds 'more open' and 'more detailed' in its treble reproduction compared to Mojo. I'm thinking this has to do with the tuning of the WTA filter so it can better match most headphones and IEM's. 

 

[Torq]

  I was looking for quite a while and couldn't find a definitive answer, only vague close estimate responses. Anyways, I'm thinking it would be great to have two flavors of Mojo (Like Vanilla and Chocolate) as some may prefer one over another. Many will say that Hugo sounds 'more open' and 'more detailed' in its treble reproduction compared to Mojo. I'm thinking this has to do with the tuning of the WTA filter so it can better match most headphones and IEM's. 

For me I have to say I did find a difference in the top and bottom end of the Hugo vs. Mojo.  I suspect the Mojo is very (and I mean very) slightly rolled off at the top-end, or it seems that way with my IEMs and those I don't own but have gotten to try it with, and it seems to have a bit more bottom end.  Which, when put next to the Hugo, tends to make the Hugo sound brighter (I think it's actually closer to neutral and wouldn't describe it as bright per-se) and also seems to deemphasize the lower registers.
 
Whether it's down to the filter, or something else, I'm not sure, but I saw the same traits with the 2Qute.  With the Hugo TT ... well that seemed closer to the Mojo's signature, but with the Hugo's slight, apparent, greater transparency.
 
Depending on what causes that shift in tonal balance/flavor it might be something that could be made selectable ... or that could be impossible (isn't deliberate, isn't room on the FPGA to do "both" implementations", or myriad other possibilities).  I suspect we'll be left wondering/wanting in that case though!
 
I WOULD like a "Mojo TT" ... preferably with no controls or indicators on the top of the unit!!!

 

[maxh22]

 
For me I have to say I did find a difference in the top and bottom end of the Hugo vs. Mojo.  I suspect the Mojo is very (and I mean very) slightly rolled off at the top-end, or it seems that way with my IEMs and those I don't own but have gotten to try it with, and it seems to have a bit more bottom end.  Which, when put next to the Hugo, tends to make the Hugo sound brighter (I think it's actually closer to neutral and wouldn't describe it as bright per-se) and also seems to deemphasize the lower registers.
 
Whether it's down to the filter, or something else, I'm not sure, but I saw the same traits with the 2Qute.  With the Hugo TT ... well that seemed closer to the Mojo's signature, but with the Hugo's slight, apparent, greater transparency.
 
Depending on what causes that shift in tonal balance/flavor it might be something that could be made selectable ... or that could be impossible (isn't deliberate, isn't room on the FPGA to do "both" implementations", or myriad other possibilities).  I suspect we'll be left wondering/wanting in that case though!
 
I WOULD like a "Mojo TT" ... preferably with no controls or indicators on the top of the unit!!!

I'm starting to feel like the Mojo does very slightly roll off the treble, but paired with bright sounding headphones, one hardly hears it. I noticed that with some warm sounding headphones or IEM's, it doesn't quite have that treble energy im accustomed to hearing with other dacs. Here's a particular song where I found this apparent: Albin Lee Meldau - Lou Lou. When he plucks his guitar it  sounds slightly sharp on other dacs, but on Mojo it sounds very "Relaxed". 

 

[Mojo ideas]

26,000 taps is the closest to a definitive statement as I've read ... the same as I've seen specified for Hugo.

I'm sure it's called out earlier in the thread, just going from memory as I'm far too lazy to search for it!

Actually it's about twice as many as Hugo but run at half the speed giving approximately the same number crunching power in terms of DSP ..... We have mentioned this before, but didn't want to put much focus on it as this is a small only part of the over design of Rob's overall topology

 

[x RELIC x]

For me I have to say I did find a difference in the top and bottom end of the Hugo vs. Mojo.  I suspect the Mojo is very (and I mean very) slightly rolled off at the top-end, or it seems that way with my IEMs and those I don't own but have gotten to try it with, and it seems to have a bit more bottom end.  Which, when put next to the Hugo, tends to make the Hugo sound brighter (I think it's actually closer to neutral and wouldn't describe it as bright per-se) and also seems to deemphasize the lower registers.

Whether it's down to the filter, or something else, I'm not sure, but I saw the same traits with the 2Qute.  With the Hugo TT ... well that seemed closer to the Mojo's signature, but with the Hugo's slight, apparent, greater transparency.

Depending on what causes that shift in tonal balance/flavor it might be something that could be made selectable ... or that could be impossible (isn't deliberate, isn't room on the FPGA to do "both" implementations", or myriad other possibilities).  I suspect we'll be left wondering/wanting in that case though!

I WOULD like a "Mojo TT" ... preferably with no controls or indicators on the top of the unit!!!

Rob has specifically said he has tuned the Mojo with a smoother sound than the Hugo given it's intended portable purpose. Here is his reply to my query when I asked him some questions for my review of the Mojo:

"Q: In the Mojo presentation draft it mentions “Hugo like sound quality and musicality”. What differences in audio presentation would you say the Mojo has compared to the Hugo?
A: "Bearing in mind it’s use I have optimized the noise performance in order to make it sound smoother.""

However, I also feel that he may have implemented some better (updated) noise floor modulation in the Mojo as well which would also make it seem smoother than the Hugo. For what it's worth, I find the tonality of the Mojo to be not too far off from the DAVE, but DAVE has much better bass impact, more detail and resolution, and more extension on both ends of the spectrum, yet still smooth. What are your thoughts Torq regarding the tonality similarities between the two, since I know you've heard both?