[alxw0w]

My thoughts:

Maybe they are happy that Mojo purchasers are all buying higher level Chord DACs. Meaning they can afford to drop the Mojo price. (Like imagine if they dropped 25% from the price of the M-Scaler.)
They are making a Mojo 2.
They are making a Mojo/Poly combined into one unit.
They are just being kind.
Mojo sales have dropped off.

I deeply believe that mojo 2 is comming I mean, I hope so.

 

[Cann3dh33t]

I deeply believe that mojo 2 is comming I mean, I hope so.

I hope it has a high quality screen on it.
Mojo 2 DAP!

 

[joshnor713]

I hope it has a high quality screen on it.
Mojo 2 DAP!

Chord has said that the Mojo+Poly is their model of a DAP. In other words, I don't think they see a reason to release a traditional DAP in light of it.

 

[Totoxio]

My wishes for 2Mojo:

Less sensitive to source electrical / electromagnetic noise.
Taller and slimmer, more cellphone-like shape, for better ergonomics when kept on the pockets.
2v and 3v line out presets
An option to gradually increase volume at startup, to avoid blasting your ears when you forgot to lower the volume before using some sensitive earphones. (Happens too easily and it's REALLY dangerous!)
USB-C input
One 3.5mm and one 6.4mm socket
Includes a silicon cover to avoid scratches and minor bumps, nothing too fancy or expensive.
Same super amazing, transparent, natural sound.

 

[flyte3333]

although definitely on the conservative side.

Yes the question to Rob is about this part and it’s effect (or not) on the time domain performance, for > PCM44.1 recordings.

Just a friendly question for @Rob Watts

 

[ZappaMan]

Anything to do with graphs, and jazz is deputised by rob, to give answers. No better man infact.

 

[flyte3333]

Anything to do with graphs, and jazz is deputised by rob, to give answers. No better man infact.

The question is beyond the graphs.

It’s a question about changing the FR (we know this is deliberate for Mojo) and its affect on time domain performance...

This is something only the designer can discuss...

 

[JaZZ]

Just one hint: Rob's HF filter for DAVE, Hugo₂ and TT₂ makes for a comparable roll-off above 20 kHz, in the case of DAVE 20 kHz is already down by ~1 dB. The designer himself recommends to use it with hi-res, thus everything from 88 kHz up, for suppressing ultrasonic noise. So it can't be that bad. I have the HF filter engaged on my DAVE and think it offers some benefit, certainly it's not detrimental to the sound quality and the Chord magic. So I guess the Mojo's fixed HF filter won't be any worse, even offer the same benefit with high sampling rates.

Generally speaking, a smooth filter like the one at hand isn't prone to do much harm to transients, unlike usual antialiasing filters which need to be extremely sharp – with the exception of Rob's WTA implementation which takes care for timing.

Nevertheless, I hope Rob himself will chime in and explain the issue in detail.

 

[musickid]

Bravo Jazz.

 

[flyte3333]

Just one hint: Rob's HF filter for DAVE, Hugo₂ and TT₂ makes for a comparable roll-off above 20 kHz, in the case of DAVE 20 kHz is already down by ~1 dB. The designer himself recommends to use it with hi-res, thus everything from 88 kHz up, for suppressing ultrasonic noise. So it can't be that bad. I have the HF filter engaged on my DAVE and think it offers some benefit, certainly it's not detrimental to the sound quality and the Chord magic. So I guess the Mojo's fixed HF filter won't be any worse, even offer the same benefit with high sampling rates.

Generally speaking, a smooth filter like the one at hand isn't prone to do much harm to transients, unlike usual antialiasing filters which need to be extremely sharp – with the exception of Rob's WTA implementation which takes care for timing.

Nevertheless, I hope Rob himself will chime in and explain the issue in detail.

Thanks Jazz. I'm aware of the HF of Dave and Hugo2, having enjoyed both myself... but I don't need to mention this for this question.

I could ask this same question on the Dave thread or Hugo2 thread...

When you say "So it can't be that bad" and "certainly it's not detrimental to the sound quality and the Chord magic" I just want to note that my technical query to @Rob Watts isn't because there is a problem...

I know on forums people assume that if someone asks a question, they must have a problem... there is no problem at my end... it's a technical query for fun learning purposes (for those interested in learning...)

As you know, in the case of Mojo there is no 'incisive filter option (a deliberate design decision - we know)...

So the question for Mojo is not just for > PCM44.1kHz recordings but also how this HF filter affects even RBCD and transients...

I'm no expert, which is why I'm asking Rob here... but since FR and time domain response are closely related, I wanted to understand how the HF filter works without affecting time domain performance... even for RBCD... we know Rob is big on transient performance....

 

[STR-1]

It definitely smells like clearing out stock for something new, also someone from canjam mentioned something new going happening on Mojo scene but couldn't say much about it.

This offer is available from all authorised Chord dealers, at least in the UK.

 

[ZappaMan]

This offer is available from all authorised Chord dealers, at least in the UK.

I heard amazon too

 

[JaZZ]

Thanks Jazz. I'm aware of the HF of Dave and Hugo2, having enjoyed both myself... but I don't need to mention this for this question.

I know on forums people assume that if someone asks a question, they must have a problem... there is no problem at my end... it's a technical query for fun learning purposes (for those interested in learning...)

So the question for Mojo is not just for > PCM44.1kHz recordings but also how this HF filter affects even RBCD and transients...

Hi Em2016

Now you're assuming too much on your part. My responses were directed at the criticism in the quoted test in the first instance:

The reviewer mentions PCM192kHz input still has a cutoff at ~20kHz.

But it seems like they are saying that with the FR cut-off at ~20kHz , for > PCM44.1 recordings there will be trade-off the time-domain (transients?) performance.

So are they right about Mojo's transient response trade-off here, especially for recordings over PCM44.1 kHz rates?

I know you want an answer from Rob, but this is an open forum...

 

[flyte3333]

Hi Em2016

Now you're assuming too much on your part. My responses were directed at the criticism in the quoted test in the first instance:

Hi JaZZ

I wasn't criticizing your comment. I was just providing a clarification... that there is no technical problem at my end...

I know you want an answer from Rob, but this is an open forum...

Absolutely agreed and I appreciate your input and effort to try and help with this technical query...

But I think this query can only be answered by Rob though...

 

[musickid]

It's really funny are we here to dissect things or just enjoy music. Yes i do enjoy learning about the engineering and theory that has gone into chord products alot but when people start arguing about it...well.