HUGO with FOSTEX TH900/SilverDragon vs. HUGO with McIntosh MHP1000
Dec 30, 2014 at 2:39 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 8

Priaptor

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Posts
232
Likes
151
Just got the McIntosh yesterday to try and compare with the Fostex.  
 
The HUGO is the fixed variable.  I am trying both with a MacBook Pro running JRiver Version 20.  
 
The Fostex are better looking, to me at least and have a more solid feel but the Mac is much better in isolation and on the latter, not even a close call.  They really fit snug and are very comfortable, more than I expected and are lighter than their specs would lead you to think.
 
The Fostex obviously have a fixed cable whereas the Mac has removable cables with included minijack and 1/4" cables.  I have no clue what they are using for their cable. 
 
Packaging is equal for both.  Nothing like Audeze but adequate.  Both have a crappy leather bag to take with you.
 
List price for the McIntosh is 2K and the Fostex/SilverDragon $1,850. 
 
Sonically, I am just starting to compare and did a little listening last night and will report more on my findings as the Macs break-in.  The Fostex are easier to drive but the Macs do just fine with the HUGO.  I believe, assuming that one is willing to spend the $$ both cans will be a very good match for the HUGO.   
 
More to come assuming there is an interest in this thread. 
 
Jan 28, 2015 at 10:13 AM Post #3 of 8
  Hi,
 
Any updates to your experience? I'm considering TH900 + Hugo myself and was wondering how you liked it. So on the recabling of silver dragon you kept single ended 1/4 plug?

I think it is awesome.  
 
Just a couple of negatives.  The TH900 while good at isolation are not as good at isolating as the cups on the McIntosh.  That is all I can say about negatives.
 
Yes I keep the 1/4 inch plug.  The HUGO has more than enough power for these fine headphones and sonically, especially when considering that this is a portable unit, I find the combination to be incredible.  I have tried the HD800 with the HUGO and I could never recommend the two.  Yes, it drives the HD800s, but I did not appreciate the incredible sonic of the HD800 of others with the HUGO.  On the other hand I have tried the LCD-X with the HUGO and if you are in the market for open can, I recommend those as well with the HUGO.
 
Despite what others think, I find the HUGO an amazing little device.  My main rig at home is a big system with an MSB DAC, ARC amps and NOLA Concert Grand speakers.  Believe it or not, there are times I enjoy the intimacy of the HUGO/Fostex as much.  I don't experience any mid range loss of detail or higher octave annoyance.  Yes they are slightly colored but not as overwhelming as some have claimed. 
 
My only disclaimer is that I was looking for cans that would "mesh well" with the HUGO.  The HUGO was a fixed variable to me.  I was not sold on a particular headphone and then trying to match it with an amp.  Quite the other way around. 
 
Apr 1, 2015 at 12:16 PM Post #5 of 8
So how was your experience comparing TH900 and MHP1000

IMHO, not close.  First the TH900 are easier to drive.  The MHP1000 are not meant for something like the HUGO.  To get their best, they need more power.  I did try the new Mac headamp (which I would never buy at 4.5K) and that was a different story.  However, even then I found the Fostex were more engaging, more open clearly better soundstage and very lush on vocals and strings, whereas I found the MHP1000 a little sterile and just .
 
Now the real eye opener.  In conducting my listening tests, I came across a pair of LCD-X.  Of all the headphones I have tried with the HUGO, nothing, when it comes to my tastes compare to this.  I kept the Fostex for awhile as I had them since September and figured I would have a closed can as well as an open, however, the LCD-X was so awesome I never listened to the Fostex anymore so I sold them.  
 
Long story short, if someone is going to use a the HUGO as a headamp and wants a good pair of headphones, the Fostex are excellent and engaging, can be easily driven by the HUGO but IMO, the LCD-X are the more neutral and more enjoyable headphones that brings me much closer to my main system which is amazing.  While the MHP1000 are good, they didn't really do it for me, especially at the price of 2K.  Yeah they are more "neutral" than the Fostex but not as engaging whereas I found the LCD-X to be not just neutral but amazingly engaging.  Just love the combo
 
Oct 27, 2015 at 6:46 AM Post #7 of 8
I also used to have HUGO, TH900 and LCD-X, and... I sold the LCD-X.  
 
This mainly for confort (lack of) issue with the LCD-X that I could not use for more than 1 hour.  Way too heavy and clamping for me.  besides this problem.....I confirm that the LCD-X pair very well with the HUGO.
 
Mar 13, 2017 at 7:30 AM Post #8 of 8
Funny, have been trying a LCD-X with the Hugo TT and for more that I try liking it and keeping the LCD can't help feeling that they are not at all engaging. I feel the bass is a bit strange. It goes low but the main focus (impact) is not that low and the highs are somehow limited, a bit like one sort of bandpass filter going on. Sad, I just do not know if it is a problem with this particular unit but can't even find them more engaging than my old HD650, despite the LCD being defnitely in a different quality class.
It is frustrating as I can't help thinking in the bass slam I got in a shop demo of the Sony Z7... so I wonder if the TH900 take me closer to that fun factor. I do not give a damn about neutrality of refernce, I need these to have fun because I was seraching for a way to listen to some music when the dear half is in "bring it down please" mode while I am listening the main system, but in that respect the LCD-X are a major disapointment as they are very compromised compared with main system ( as most probably all headphones will be) and still bring nothing fun to the equation...I have been trying hard because I would love to love them.
Wondering if the TH900 would be my ticket.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top