[x RELIC x]

Of course you’re talking about 2 DAC/amps. I have read that the amp section of the Hugo(I) was weaker (relatively) vs the DAC section — could that be the basis of your preference? I haven’t heard the Q5, but reviews make it seem quite competent. Are you using default amp? I can compare E2 from my Plenue 2 (4497) vs Opus #2 (9018).

And yes. The amp section of Hugo 1 is very weak.

Compared to the Q5 the Hugo(1) output power is actually more. Not sure where this ‘weak amp section’ stuff is coming from. It’s actually not a seperate ‘amp section’ but the analogue output from the DAC, unlike tradition DAC/amp combo’s. The design is very different. Just sharing information and facts.

Tonality may be quite different though, as expected, but don’t mistake that for a lack of power. Hugo(1) should have ample power, Q5=440mW balanced in to 32 Ohms , Hugo(1)= 600mW in to 32 Ohms - and Current (Q5=150mA, Hugo(1)=500mA) - enough to drive the ETHER2 well, but regarding synergy and preferences... I don’t know.

 

[davisman]

I think Dan mentioned sensitivity was somewhere in the low 90s and the impedance is 16 ohms.

So I was giving Kesha Rainbow album a go, because why not. And at the end of Let Them Talk leading into Woman, I literally jumped out of my skin thinking someone was behind me. E2 gonna give me a heart attack

 

[davisman]

Quick update on tubes for E2. I spent most of the day with my daughter, so the matsushita's were left playing all day until I got some time this evening. I think this is the tube that I can without a doubt say is worth the $80 I spent on them. I think they are going to be my go to, the most neutral tube I have heard yet. Definite winner.

 

[franz12]

Compared to the Q5 the Hugo(1) output power is actually more. Not sure where this ‘weak amp section’ stuff is coming from. It’s actually not a seperate ‘amp section’ but the analogue output from the DAC, unlike tradition DAC/amp combo’s. The design is very different. Just sharing information and facts.

Tonality may be quite different though, as expected, but don’t mistake that for a lack of power. Hugo(1) should have ample power, Q5=440mW balanced in to 32 Ohms , Hugo(1)= 600mW in to 32 Ohms - and Current (Q5=150mA, Hugo(1)=500mA) - enough to drive the ETHER2 well, but regarding synergy and preferences... I don’t know.

I used Hugo 1 with my ether c flow more than a year. I discovered sub-bass thumb only after I changed my amp section to others (MTCH, Q5). There might have been idiosyncrasy on my unit. I really don't know why, although on paper the amp section of Hugo 1 looks good. But it was just my experience as a previous owner.

 

[musickid]

Maybe tighter bass control and more well defined bass on hugo1 so not bloomy and muffled??? an idea.....

 

[x RELIC x]

I used Hugo 1 with my ether c flow more than a year. I discovered sub-bass thumb only after I changed my amp section to others (MTCH, Q5). There might have been idiosyncrasy on my unit. I really don't know why, although on paper the amp section of Hugo 1 looks good. But it was just my experience as a previous owner.

Like I said, likely just different presentations and synergy/preferences. Nothing wrong with that but it's best to keep the technical facts straight.

Edit: To add, I use the Mojo with the ETHER Flow C as well and it drives them perfectly fine (exact same power output as Hugo(1)). The ETHER C Flow is a bit bright overall.

 

[LCMusicLover]

Compared to the Q5 the Hugo(1) output power is actually more. Not sure where this ‘weak amp section’ stuff is coming from. It’s actually not a seperate ‘amp section’ but the analogue output from the DAC, unlike tradition DAC/amp combo’s. The design is very different. Just sharing information and facts.

Tonality may be quite different though, as expected, but don’t mistake that for a lack of power. Hugo(1) should have ample power, Q5=440mW balanced in to 32 Ohms , Hugo(1)= 600mW in to 32 Ohms - and Current (Q5=150mA, Hugo(1)=500mA) - enough to drive the ETHER2 well, but regarding synergy and preferences... I don’t know.

Perhaps my words were poorly chosen.

By weaker, I meant that the Hugo DAC section was relatively better than the Hugo amp section, not that it produced less power. And that’s just based on reviews I’ve read. Seems like there are some reviewers who love the entire Hugo DAC/amp package, and others who prefer to use the Hugo DAC to feed an external amp. And that preference seems to arise either from perceived bad pairings with specific headphones, or due to listening preferences.

I was trying to figure out what made @franz12 prefer the Q5 to the Hugo — a preference which surprised me. Sorry if my words rubbed you wrong.

 

[x RELIC x]

By weaker, I meant that the Hugo DAC section was relatively better than the Hugo amp section.

Well, there is no separate 'amp section' in the Hugo. It's akin to the line-out of other DACs and you can't separate the sound of the DAC from the analogue output. You may not be aware of this information from the designer.

Nothing is rubbing me wrong so please don't take it that way. I am only sharing information.

The preference for the Q5 may simply be the tuning and synergy.

Edit: For the record, I found the Hugo(1) a bit too bright for my tastes so I imagine with the ETHER Flow C it would indeed be too bright with a sense of lacking bass.

 

[LCMusicLover]

Well, there is no separate 'amp section' in the Hugo. It's akin to the line-out of other DACs and you can't separate the sound of the DAC from the analogue output. You may not be aware of this information from the designer...

Nope, didn’t know that. Seems like some professional reviewers didn’t seem to know that either, as they include separate assessments of the ‘DAC section’ and the ‘amp section’.

...The preference for the Q5 may simply be the tuning and synergy.

Edit: For the record, I found the Hugo(1) a bit too bright for my tastes so I imagine with the ETHER Flow C it would indeed be too bright with a sense of lacking bass.

Yes, that’s probably it.

 

[franz12]

Anne Akiko Meyers' "Mirror In Mirror" is remarkable and brilliant through the LP and the MrSpeakers Ether2. There is an unmatched fullness and richness of the Meyers' violin.

I just read Katz's shoot out lcd4 vs utopia.
It is striking to me that almost all audio pros prefer lcd4 over utopia, even though utopia is seemingly more popular than lcd4 on the head-fi.
Would you be able to compare sonic character between ether 2 and lcd4?
I heard lcd4, but it was 3 years ago in a loud environment, so I barely remember..

 

[llcook51]

Quick update on tubes for E2. I spent most of the day with my daughter, so the matsu****a's were left playing all day until I got some time this evening. I think this is the tube that I can without a doubt say is worth the $80 I spent on them. I think they are going to be my go to, the most neutral tube I have heard yet. Definite winner.

Thanks for the update. I am still enjoying the Gold Lions.

 

[LCMusicLover]

I just read Katz's shoot out lcd4 vs utopia.
It is striking to me that almost all audio pros prefer lcd4 over utopia, even though utopia is seemingly more popular than lcd4 on the head-fi...

It’s a bit like we should like Utopia, and LCD-4 is a guilty pleasure.

Personally, I’m in the middle. I agree with the one listener who commented negatively on the bass/sub-bass of LCD-4. But I also agree with many of the comments about Utopia (bright, forward, some percussion drown out vocals...) Utopia w/ Elex pads makes that much less of an issue for me.

 

[llcook51]

Llŷr Williams: Beethoven Unbound is a phenomenal album for any HP that delivers fast crystal clear highs: enter the E2. The sensitive playing by Williams of these sonatas opens up the E2.

 

[betula]

Would anyone be kind enough to compare Ether2 bass to Audeze bass for me? I haven't found much information regarding this specific comparison in the thread. I am particularly interested if the E2 has the same level of bass/sub-bass impact and slam. I am pretty sure the extension and separation is there. Thank you.

 

[rockytopwiz]

Would anyone be kind enough to compare Ether2 bass to Audeze bass for me? I haven't found much information regarding this specific comparison in the thread. I am particularly interested if the E2 has the same level of bass/sub-bass impact and slam. I am pretty sure the extension and separation is there. Thank you.

We seem to have gotten a mixed bag so far when it comes to that comparison. Some have directly related the two as being similar and others have said it is more "ethereal."

Idk what to think about these anymore, it seems like as soon as someone gives one impression the next is pretty much the opposite. I was interested when I was hearing that it was a warmer mr.speakers but then others say it's not warmer and say it has a treble tilt similar to the mr.speakers house sound.

I would certainly like to hear them.