[cathee]

got my mojo for 4 days now, and whaou.... Tried it with fostex TH900 (incredible), and HD650 (not bad at al). All that connected to a late 2013 Macbook pro (core I7/16gb), and playing through Audirvana.
happy owner I am

+1

 

[betula]

Quite often some users question the ability of Mojo to drive certain headphones. I love my Mojo, and always thought it can drive anything. (I still think it can.) Loudness however is not everything. There is a certain 'fullness' of sound that the Mojo can't offer. Yes, Mojo can drive almost any headphone loud enough. But the sound won't feel as 'full' as it can.
This was my perception with the Hugo2 and this is my perception now with the Questyle CMA600i.
I love the Mojo, don't misunderstand me. But, after listening to the CMA600i and Hugo2, I know what people mean when they say the Mojo is not enough for their headphones.
After comparing the Mojo to similarly or higher priced equipment, this becomes more obvious. With the Hugo2 or CMA600i for instance the sound becomes 'fuller'. More body, more texture. Mojo is very mid focused. Both the Hugo2 and CMA600i add more bass and treble extension. More juice to bass and treble. Offering a thicker, more satisfying sound. A better extension, more flesh on the bass and treble, not just the awesome mids.
I still love the Mojo. I think, it is exceptional for the price. But perhaps saying this is all one needs when looking for a DAC/amp is a slight exaggeration.

 

[x RELIC x]

Quite often some users question the ability of Mojo to drive certain headphones. I love my Mojo, and always thought it can drive anything. (I still think it can.) Loudness however is not everything. There is a certain 'fullness' of sound that the Mojo can't offer. Yes, Mojo can drive almost any headphone loud enough. But the sound won't feel as 'full' as it can.
This was my perception with the Hugo2 and this is my perception now with the Questyle CMA600i.
I love the Mojo, don't misunderstand me. But, after listening to the CMA600i and Hugo2, I know what people mean when they say the Mojo is not enough for their headphones.
After comparing the Mojo to similarly or higher priced equipment, this becomes more obvious. With the Hugo2 or CMA600i for instance the sound becomes 'fuller'. More body, more texture. Mojo is very mid focused. Both the Hugo2 and CMA600i add more bass and treble extension. More juice to bass and treble. Offering a thicker, more satisfying sound. A better extension, more flesh on the bass and treble, not just the awesome mids.
I still love the Mojo. I think, it is exceptional for the price. But perhaps saying this is all one needs when looking for a DAC/amp is a slight exaggeration.

Where the disconnect and circular debate comes from is the assumption that it’s simply the max power output spec that makes the difference. If the sound quality differences one hears with different gear remain at all volume levels then the tuning and implementation is the reason for the differences, not max power output (especially if you are not listening anywhere near max volume).

Glad you’re liking the CMA600i because ‘all one needs’ is the sound they like!!

 

[betula]

Where the disconnect and circular debate comes from is the assumption that it’s simply the max power output spec that makes the difference. If the sound quality differences one hears with different gear remain at all volume levels then the tuning and implementation is the reason for the differences, not max power output (especially if you are not listening anywhere near max volume).

Glad you’re liking the CMA600i because ‘all one needs’ is the sound they like!!

Max power output nowadays seems to be just numbers on the specs sheet. Many seem to refer to them as the holy grail of truth. It is a bit misleading as it does not cover all the truth what makes something sound 'good' or 'enjoyable'.
I think I know what you mean by tuning, but what do you exactly mean by 'implementation'?

 

[x RELIC x]

Max power output nowadays seems to be just numbers on the specs sheet. Many seem to refer to them as the holy grail of truth. It is a bit misleading as it does not cover all the truth what makes something sound 'good' or 'enjoyable'.
I think I know what you mean by tuning, but what do you exactly mean by 'implementation'?

I mean implementation such as clean power source, power supply rails, slew rate, differential vs bridged, output impedance, etc. as some examples.

Edit: A prime example with the Questyle is the ‘Current Mode Amplification’ as a highlight of their implementation difference vs other gear.

 

[deanorthk]

Ha I've found the first small problem, I can't charge it direct connect usb to my Macbook pro, neither with my iphone charger (using a third party usb cables). only source that work so far is my charger that came with my Kindle

 

[surfgeorge]

Quite often some users question the ability of Mojo to drive certain headphones. I love my Mojo, and always thought it can drive anything. (I still think it can.) Loudness however is not everything. There is a certain 'fullness' of sound that the Mojo can't offer. Yes, Mojo can drive almost any headphone loud enough. But the sound won't feel as 'full' as it can.
This was my perception with the Hugo2 and this is my perception now with the Questyle CMA600i.
I love the Mojo, don't misunderstand me. But, after listening to the CMA600i and Hugo2, I know what people mean when they say the Mojo is not enough for their headphones.
After comparing the Mojo to similarly or higher priced equipment, this becomes more obvious. With the Hugo2 or CMA600i for instance the sound becomes 'fuller'. More body, more texture. Mojo is very mid focused. Both the Hugo2 and CMA600i add more bass and treble extension. More juice to bass and treble. Offering a thicker, more satisfying sound. A better extension, more flesh on the bass and treble, not just the awesome mids.
I still love the Mojo. I think, it is exceptional for the price. But perhaps saying this is all one needs when looking for a DAC/amp is a slight exaggeration.

Always a pleasure reading your balanced and insightful posts!
One thing that has deeply impressed me about the Mojo is the depth, layering and focus of the soundstage.
I am considering the Qutest for my stereo system now, and expecting Hugo2 SQ from it.

How do the MCA600i and Hugo 2 compare to the Mojo in terms of soundstage, and since I am already asking, also in detail retrieval?

 

[betula]

Always a pleasure reading your balanced and insightful posts!
One thing that has deeply impressed me about the Mojo is the depth, layering and focus of the soundstage.
I am considering the Qutest for my stereo system now, and expecting Hugo2 SQ from it.

How do the MCA600i and Hugo 2 compare to the Mojo in terms of soundstage, and since I am already asking, also in detail retrieval?

You are right, depth, layering and focus is exceptional with Chord DACs. Both the Mojo and Hugo2 punch well above their price range in this regard. However, while these attributes are important and offer quite an impressive insight to the music, it is not everything. It is not that difficult to find a more pleasing overall sound than Mojo with wider soundstage, better balance (more 'tangible' bass/treble) and a thicker, meatier sound. You will need to spend about the price of two/three Mojos though.
Both the CMA600i and Hugo2 have significantly wider soundstage in comparison. Hugo2 has much better detail retrieval than Mojo. To my ears CMA600i is somewhere between them.

 

[surfgeorge]

You are right, depth, layering and focus is exceptional with Chord DACs. Both the Mojo and Hugo2 punch well above their price range in this regard. However, while these attributes are important and offer quite an impressive insight to the music, it is not everything. It is not that difficult to find a more pleasing overall sound than Mojo with wider soundstage, better balance (more 'tangible' bass/treble) and a thicker, meatier sound. You will need to spend about the price of two/three Mojos though.
Both the CMA600i and Hugo2 have significantly wider soundstage in comparison. Hugo2 has much better detail retrieval than Mojo. To my ears CMA600i is somewhere between them.

Thanks Betula!
And that leads me to one more question: Mojo keeps instruments separated and focused in very busy and loud orchestral music.
I understood Rob Watts' explanations in the way that regular DAC chips have an inherent issue with that due to their architecture (the explanations made sense to me but I can't explain what Rob said...).
Can the CMA600i keep up with the Mojo in that sense? My desktop DAC (in Stereo system) is fine with a small Jazz ensemble but a symphony becomes one big mass of sound while the Mojo keeps things separated much better.
And you mentioned the CMA600i having a wider soundstage - how does it's depth and layering compare?

I hope this also is of some value to others.

 

[betula]

Thanks Betula!
And that leads me to one more question: Mojo keeps instruments separated and focused in very busy and loud orchestral music.
I understood Rob Watts' explanations in the way that regular DAC chips have an inherent issue with that due to their architecture (the explanations made sense to me but I can't explain what Rob said...).
Can the CMA600i keep up with the Mojo in that sense? My desktop DAC (in Stereo system) is fine with a small Jazz ensemble but a symphony becomes one big mass of sound while the Mojo keeps things separated much better.
And you mentioned the CMA600i having a wider soundstage - how does it's depth and layering compare?

I hope this also is of some value to others.

You are asking me a rather difficult question here. The Mojo and the CMA600i are very different animals. It is like you asked me to compare a mouse to an elephant. Well, both are mammals. In our case both devices are used to reproduce music.
As Relic has just said, the overall performance of a device depends on many things. The DAC section is just one piece of a chain. There is tuning and implementation, etc.
The Mojo as a DAC is slightly superior to the DAC setion of the CMA600i, if I had to put it into numbers, I would say 10-15% better. When I say better, I mean it offers slightly better depth and separation, all the well-known strengths of Chord DACs.
On the other hand the amp section, implementation etc makes the CMA600i a much better, more pleasing sounding device. In certain things you might loose 10% compared to the Mojo, but in other things you gain 60-80%.
If we made a list of ten sound attributes, I would say Mojo wins in 2-3 while the 600i wins in 7-8. It is hard to explain without auditioning, and there is personal preference too.
While you might loose 10% of depth and instrument separation, you gain so much on other things (bass/treble extension, body, texture, soundstage, balance, smoothness etc) that it is not really a competition and you won't mind loosing that 10% in depth for example when you gain so much with a high-end refined sound.
I hope this gibberish makes some sense to you.

 

[surfgeorge]

You are asking me a rather difficult question here. The Mojo and the CMA600i are very different animals. It is like you asked me to compare a mouse to an elephant. Well, both are mammals. In our case both devices are used to reproduce music.
As Relic has just said, the overall performance of a device depends on many things. The DAC section is just one piece of a chain. There is tuning and implementation, etc.
The Mojo as a DAC is slightly superior to the DAC setion of the CMA600i, if I had to put it into numbers, I would say 10-15% better. When I say better, I mean it offers slightly better depth and separation, all the well-known strengths of Chord DACs.
On the other hand the amp section, implementation etc makes the CMA600i a much better, more pleasing sounding device. In certain things you might loose 10% compared to the Mojo, but in other things you gain 60-80%.
If we made a list of ten sound attributes, I would say Mojo wins in 2-3 while the 600i wins in 7-8. It is hard to explain without auditioning, and there is personal preference too.
While you might loose 10% of depth and instrument separation, you gain so much on other things (bass/treble extension, body, texture, soundstage, balance, smoothness etc) that it is not really a competition and you won't mind loosing that 10% in depth for example when you gain so much with a high-end refined sound.
I hope this gibberish makes some sense to you.

Sorry for asking such a difficult question - but your are doing a great job at answering it!
Does it make sense to me? Yes and no, I have not heard any HP DAC/Amp above the Mojo, so I can only imagine what you are describing but that image is becoming clearer with your last few posts.
Very funny to compare the Mojo with a mouse

I'll see if I can get the funds together for the Qutest.

 

[jdnyc718]

Quite often some users question the ability of Mojo to drive certain headphones. I love my Mojo, and always thought it can drive anything. (I still think it can.) Loudness however is not everything. There is a certain 'fullness' of sound that the Mojo can't offer. Yes, Mojo can drive almost any headphone loud enough. But the sound won't feel as 'full' as it can.
This was my perception with the Hugo2 and this is my perception now with the Questyle CMA600i.
I love the Mojo, don't misunderstand me. But, after listening to the CMA600i and Hugo2, I know what people mean when they say the Mojo is not enough for their headphones.
After comparing the Mojo to similarly or higher priced equipment, this becomes more obvious. With the Hugo2 or CMA600i for instance the sound becomes 'fuller'. More body, more texture. Mojo is very mid focused. Both the Hugo2 and CMA600i add more bass and treble extension. More juice to bass and treble. Offering a thicker, more satisfying sound. A better extension, more flesh on the bass and treble, not just the awesome mids.
I still love the Mojo. I think, it is exceptional for the price. But perhaps saying this is all one needs when looking for a DAC/amp is a slight exaggeration.

I think the Mojo suffers from heavy-handed dynamic compression. I have been comparing against the IFI Nano BL using a pair of Sennheiser HD600's and found the vocal timbre of the Mojo to be spot on, but man the IFI destroys the Mojo in terms of soundstage and treble presence. It's very obvious when listening to live recordings where crowd reaction through the Mojo sounds distant and somewhat muffled and the IFI is much clearer with better imaging. I'm trying to choose between the two now and it's a bit tough. Do I take the Mojo with it's intimate soundstage and natural vocals or the IFI with it's expanded soundstage and less accurate (more digital?) sounding vocals.

 

[betula]

I think the Mojo suffers from heavy-handed dynamic compression. I have been comparing against the IFI Nano BL using a pair of Sennheiser HD600's and found the vocal timbre of the Mojo to be spot on, but man the IFI destroys the Mojo in terms of soundstage and treble presence. It's very obvious when listening to live recordings where crowd reaction through the Mojo sounds distant and somewhat muffled and the IFI is much clearer with better imaging. I'm trying to choose between the two now and it's a bit tough. Do I take the Mojo with it's intimate soundstage and natural vocals or the IFI with it's expanded soundstage and less accurate (more digital?) sounding vocals.

To me the Nano BL vs Mojo is not a contest. Mojo is just way superior sounding IMO. Also depends on the headphones you use though. Cheaper headphones might sound better on the Nano however more expensive headphones (+£200) start to show Mojo's capabilities. In my opinion Mojo is on the Micro BL's level, not on the Nano's. Even when comparing it to the Micro, it is pretty much personal preference and not a win/loose situation.

 

[betula]

Sorry for asking such a difficult question - but your are doing a great job at answering it!
Does it make sense to me? Yes and no, I have not heard any HP DAC/Amp above the Mojo, so I can only imagine what you are describing but that image is becoming clearer with your last few posts.
Very funny to compare the Mojo with a mouse

I'll see if I can get the funds together for the Qutest.

Might worth to look into buying a 2Qute instead of the Qutest. These days you can find the 2Qute for pretty much half the price of the Qutest. I might buy a 2Qute in the foreseeable future.

 

[deanorthk]

having read the FAQ (thanks again) , I understand now why I had a loud buzzing sound when charging my MOJO... So now I do am seeking advices about what I the best charger out there for the MOJO