Hugo M Scaler by Chord Electronics - The Official Thread
Dec 31, 2018 at 12:58 PM Post #4,711 of 18,496
I can assure him or anyone that there can be an improvement, in my case a pretty bloody big one,

The cables make a big change to the sound, I much prefer this warmer softer tone than everything being pin sharp and unrealistic.

My music has probably been getting butchered and contaminated by rfi for years, and me not knowing it. :frowning2:

Spot on IMO. Not a small difference. That’s why I kept them after my trial.
 
Dec 31, 2018 at 2:40 PM Post #4,712 of 18,496
Chord have already solved the RF problem in Hugo MScaler. There can’t be any improvement. Stock cable sounds the best :)

That’s the stance from AndrewOld.
That may be AndrewOld's case, but not everybody's case. I concur that Nick's BNC does improves the sound. It's very hard to quantify the improvement but it's easy to hear that the cable does make a difference. There are other headfiers' participated in this thread also mentioned that the WAVE BNC cable makes difference.
 
Dec 31, 2018 at 3:03 PM Post #4,713 of 18,496
the wave cable is a fine product albeit at a cost....the truth is all of this all of these high end improvements become subjective decisions that only the individual can decide the worth of...if you hear the difference and can afford it go for it...the same holds true for a bottle of wine or good steak or suit etc
 
Dec 31, 2018 at 8:19 PM Post #4,714 of 18,496
I have been reading and seeing good things about Wave cables, here on the forums and also a video the other day. I thought to myself whilst watching the video, “that’s an area that I haven’t yet focused on, cables”.

Now that I have moved up to division two in the audio hardware category, I thought, maybe I should be focusing on getting some decent cables now that I have got the goods to exploit them.

I got in touch with Nick aka @Triode User who makes Wave cables. I asked him what range of cables he sold and since he knows I’m from here and he knew that I had an Mscaler and a TT2, he suggested that i try his Wave Stream cables and if I didn’t like them, I could return them for a full refund.

Fair enough, nothing to lose except £10 shipping them back if I didn’t like them, so I asked for a set of his Wave Stream cables and they arrived on Friday.

Anyone who knows me, you will know that I like my iem’s and their cables. But although I have bags of iem’s and cables, I never ever buy iem cables for their sound. Buying iem cables is purely for the bling factor, plus 99.5% of them all sound the same. True story, but don’t mention it to some iem cable fans.

Before I got the Wave Stream cables, I was already very dubious about them being able to transform music, as I was going from my iem cable experience, where schiit all sounded the same, but just looked different. I was really sceptical about them doing anything to the sound.

Anyway, Friday arrived and a big box was handed to me, all professionally printed and inside was a leaflet and two of the nicest cables I have ever seen.

They screamed quality and looked very very nice in real life. They have the same design philosophy that Chord uses, built like a tank and bombproof. I couldn’t wait to hook these bad boys up. Once done, I decided to see what they sounded like, ( remember, I’m still thinking “iem cables are useless” ). I loaded up Qobuz and selected a playlist and pushed play, within the first 20 seconds I could tell the sound had totally changed, and changed for the better.

The brightness that was there has now gone, the tone is softer and warmer and more realistic. The cables have made a huge difference, I no longer get fatigued after an hour or two of listening, like I previously did with Hugo 2 and TT2. More so with H2 than TT2, but I honestly can’t believe that 2 cables can have this much of an impact. Although all my Chord dacs sound good, these cables make them sound even better.

Rob mentions that if his dacs sound overly bright, then RFI interference is causing it. My HMS & TT2 was sitting next to my 6 aerial triple band wifi router. My music was being contaminated by my wifi router and other electrical products, which cannot be fixed by just changing positions of the electricals.

Using these cables makes the sound silky smooth compared to what it was like before. The cables have helped in a big way and they help make Robs MScaler and TT2 sound much better by eliminating external RFI. It’s amazing how much RFI there is in an average home nowadays.

With the wave stream cables, I can do a 3+ hour listening session easy, so easy that I fell asleep whilst listening with my HD800S on. When I woke up the music was still playing and it was 6 hours later. I NEVER fall asleep with headphones on, and to do that and stay sleeping shows how much the sharp and bright sound has been tamed / killed, as that would of woken me up had it still been present. Infact I probably wouldn’t of fallen asleep to start with had I been using the stock cables.

The music seems warmer, softer and more realistic now, compared to the digital sound that was audible with the stock cables. Even with the mscaler and TT2, you could still notice that the source was a digital source when using the stock cables. With the wave cables, any external RFI that was plagueing my MScaler and TT2 has now gone, it no longer exists and high pitched female vocals no longer sound like a “blind date gone bad”.

The tone has an overall sense of warmth and realism about it, but it does not interfere with the mscaler doing it’s thing, the same micro details are still there, timing, timbre etc etc, everything is still there but it sounds so much better and realistic.

I’m not one for trying to describe all the small nuances that makes up a track like some of you here can, but I don’t claim to be an audiophile, and I’m cool with that. When I hear something good, I can tell, and I can tell these cables are good.

They take the digital out of digital music.

I took some snaps but they are not the best, so no hating please.










how much do they cost?
 
Dec 31, 2018 at 8:28 PM Post #4,715 of 18,496
how much do they cost?

Your lucky that I can’t drink or crawl far, as I would be out getting pissed with everyone else instead of listening to music and posting on a forum.

https://www.wavehighfidelity.com

Mines are the middle set.

Costly, but until companies make things like this and do it cheaply, they will always command a high price but, you have to figure in, parts, labour, time, experimenting with different lengths, and different ferrites with different blocking frequencies. All of that soon adds up.

My photo skills are not great and my photos didnt really do the cables any justice, but I can re-assure you that they are indeed of excellent quality.

In comparison, I got Audio Technica to put a new cable on my headphones and 2 x 6.99 new pleather ear pads. £84 for less than 20 minutes work and it was just a really cheap 3.5mm cable.
 
Last edited:
Jan 1, 2019 at 10:28 AM Post #4,717 of 18,496
Jan 1, 2019 at 1:43 PM Post #4,718 of 18,496
This review on audiobacon is very good. He tested a lot of different BNC cables between DAVE and Blu2/Mscaler.

https://audiobacon.net/2018/08/11/the-audiophiles-short-list-the-best-digital-coaxial-cables/

My personal favorite, the High Fidelity Cables Revel line is very good for $350.

From review:
"I felt the Snake River Audio Boomslang, SOtM dCBL-BNC75, and WAVE Storm Reference were the rawest cables and therefore more of my taste"

What does it mean when he talks about a cable being raw?
 
Jan 1, 2019 at 1:52 PM Post #4,719 of 18,496
From review:
"I felt the Snake River Audio Boomslang, SOtM dCBL-BNC75, and WAVE Storm Reference were the rawest cables and therefore more of my taste"

What does it mean when he talks about a cable being raw?

He opens the review with this paragraph, which may explain what he means.

“My personal preference prioritizes timbre accuracy, which I would describe as a rawer and less glamorous sound. I would trade transparency, resolution, and soundstage for a more accurate hue and a fuller sound. Your tastes may be different.”

This is just nonsense. Timbral accuracy has nothing to do with rawness, it has to do with accurately conveying the tonal quality of a sound. It is the timbre of a sound that helps you tell whether the same note is being played on a clarinet, or an oboe or a flute. It is the timbre of a singers voice that helps identify them, and communicate the song. Nothing necessarily to do with rawness whatsoever. Quite possibly the opposite. Andit is absurd to suggest that timbre and resolution are some kind of a trade off. Pretty much the opposite is the case I think. A highly resolving system will let you better resolve the timbre of an instrument than a poorly resolving system. Anyone who spends $6000 on a pair of cables on the strength of such woolly judgements is rather more trusting than I would be.
 
Last edited:
Jan 1, 2019 at 3:08 PM Post #4,720 of 18,496
He opens the review with this paragraph, which may explain what he means.

“My personal preference prioritizes timbre accuracy, which I would describe as a rawer and less glamorous sound. I would trade transparency, resolution, and soundstage for a more accurate hue and a fuller sound. Your tastes may be different.”

This is just nonsense. Timbral accuracy has nothing to do with rawness, it has to do with accurately conveying the tonal quality of a sound. It is the timbre of a sound that helps you tell whether the same note is being played on a clarinet, or an oboe or a flute. It is the timbre of a singers voice that helps identify them, and communicate the song. Nothing necessarily to do with rawness whatsoever. Quite possibly the opposite. Andit is absurd to suggest that timbre and resolution are some kind of a trade off. Pretty much the opposite is the case I think. A highly resolving system will let you better resolve the timbre of an instrument than a poorly resolving system. Anyone who spends $6000 on a pair of cables on the strength of such woolly judgements is rather more trusting than I would be.

My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.

One has to remember that for Jay this has been a journey of understanding. Regulars in the Blu2 thread will remember the reports of when RW went to stay with Romaz and was joined by Jay. At that time there was an unnamed prototype being listened to and which turned out to be the new MScaler. When various cables and options were tried with it, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option. But we prefer the detail they would say and you are wrong was what RW will have told them.

When Jay did that bnc review I think he was remembering his past inclination to like digital cables which appeared to give a bit more detail. I read his worlds as him concluding that in the end he had decided he preferred to trade that false detail in a digital cables for a ‘rawer and less glamorous sound’, ie the accuracy which you cherish.
 
Last edited:
Jan 1, 2019 at 3:46 PM Post #4,721 of 18,496
My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.

One has to remember that for Jay this has been a journey of understanding. Regulars in the Blu2 thread will remember the reports of when RW went to stay with Romaz and was joined by Jay. At that time there was an unnamed prototype being listened to and which turned out to be the new MScaler. When various cables and options were tried with it, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option. But we prefer the detail they would say and you are wrong was what RW will have told them.

When Jay did that bnc review I think he was remembering his past inclination to like digital cables which appeared do give a bit more detail. I read his worlds as him concluding that in the end he had decided he preferred to trade that false detail in a digital cables for a ‘rawer and less glamorous sound’, ie the accuracy which you cherish.

Sacrebleu ! Romaz is a living breathing person ? Having read his musings him on CA, I had assumed he was an algorithm concocted by Stanford post grads. as a prank. A proctologist who travelled the world bringing anal relief to the masses, whilst, writing in a prose style, that Nabokov would have been proud of, about the most arcane audio matters. Oh, he also plays the old Joanna like Horowitz
 
Jan 1, 2019 at 3:49 PM Post #4,722 of 18,496
My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.
If you stuck a fork through your tweeters your system would sound more raw, and be less resolving and transparent. Surely this would not be a good thing. I think it might be better if Jay spoke for what Jay means, but as it stands his words don’t make much sense to me.

PS And are you saying that an M Scaler and DAVE is fatiguing with the supplied cable?
 
Last edited:
Jan 1, 2019 at 10:26 PM Post #4,723 of 18,496
Sacrebleu ! Romaz is a living breathing person ? Having read his musings him on CA, I had assumed he was an algorithm concocted by Stanford post grads. as a prank. A proctologist who travelled the world bringing anal relief to the masses, whilst, writing in a prose style, that Nabokov would have been proud of, about the most arcane audio matters. Oh, he also plays the old Joanna like Horowitz
What do you mean that "Romaz is a breathing person ?" ? Or what leads you the impression that he is not a real (breathing) person?
 
Jan 1, 2019 at 11:14 PM Post #4,724 of 18,496
My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.

One has to remember that for Jay this has been a journey of understanding. Regulars in the Blu2 thread will remember the reports of when RW went to stay with Romaz and was joined by Jay. At that time there was an unnamed prototype being listened to and which turned out to be the new MScaler. When various cables and options were tried with it, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option. But we prefer the detail they would say and you are wrong was what RW will have told them.

When Jay did that bnc review I think he was remembering his past inclination to like digital cables which appeared to give a bit more detail. I read his worlds as him concluding that in the end he had decided he preferred to trade that false detail in a digital cables for a ‘rawer and less glamorous sound’, ie the accuracy which you cherish.

I never got how less RF noise = less detail. It should be the opposite.

I'm thinking the cables with less noise were shielded much more, reducing the RFI & EMI noise, but at the same time dampening the sound, which gave it a less detailed, but cleaner sound?
 
Jan 2, 2019 at 1:14 AM Post #4,725 of 18,496
I do think it is too simplistic to suggest that the more detailed cable suffers from RFI and is wrong, as it is too suggest the the less detailed cable is correct.

And anyway just buy the cable you like the sound of. Some systems may perform better with a brighter cable.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top