Chord Hugo 2 Review (Portable DAC & HP Amp)

[paulrbarnard]

I disagree: Measurements and the review show a lot about how good the product is, and that means the votes show important information about the conclusion of the review. You are almost suggesting that the whole discussion of the product in replies has no relevance to the review either.

That’s a significant extrapolation from what I stated.

If you want to extend to the comments as well it gets even worse. The comments vary from a few reasonable discussions of the measurements to an overwhelming number of tribal back slapping and mocking of “the others” posts, taking in insults, belittling and openly making accusations of criminal intent along the way.

As I said I’ll stick with Amir’s data and comments and only look at the rest of the thread for the social commentary it provides.

 

[Audiofire]

If you want to extend to the comments as well it gets even worse. The comments vary from a few reasonable discussions of the measurements to an overwhelming number of tribal back slapping and mocking of “the others” posts, taking in insults, belittling and openly making accusations of criminal intent along the way.

There are rules about that here:

Rules for Review Threads

New Rules for Review Threads Reviews of audio products are the crown jewels of our forum. In cooperation with kind members and companies that send in gear, and collective wisdom of the contributing members, we have created an incredible asset for audiophiles. As we cover nearly one new audio...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[paulrbarnard]

There are rules about that here:

Rules for Review Threads

New Rules for Review Threads Reviews of audio products are the crown jewels of our forum. In cooperation with kind members and companies that send in gear, and collective wisdom of the contributing members, we have created an incredible asset for audiophiles. As we cover nearly one new audio...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Perhaps they need a little more rigorous application…

 

[Robbo99999]

So the ratings finish up reflecting peoples biases rather than experience. I’ll base my view of a product on Amir’s results and his comments from actually using and listening to the product and completely ignore the poll. The poll has absolutely no quantitative or subjective relevance to the product. It would seem the only relevance of the poll is for analysis of the mindset/demographic/socio-economic status of those voting.

As you know I disagree, because you quoted my post. I think "bias" is the wrong word, I think most people vote pretty fairly in the polls for items measured and reviewed on here - and it's not rocket science to realise why that is the case - because it's based on the measurements which are objective, and with a smattering of an individual interpretations (us the public) of the measurements when it comes to speakers & headphones in particular as there's more scope for how to interpret the attractiveness of the frequency response & distortion graphs, but really I think the polls are very fair and a damn good reflection of how good the product is in relation to how it measures and how it's priced within with general market. You can use the word "bias" if you like, but I really don't think that's a fair reflection of how a lot of people vote in the polls, as it seems very inline with the measurements / features & price of the item. If you don't think the poll is "worth a damn" then that's your prerogative, but you know I think you're wrong about that.

 

[jlb]

all expensive DAC's and amps are worthless..only 300 dollar DAC or amp are worthwhile all else is waste of money we all know that...just advertising dollars

 

[Audiofire]

Perhaps they need a little more rigorous application…

@amirm has added the link to his signature today after I asked about it.

 

[Trell]

all expensive DAC's and amps are worthless..only 300 dollar DAC or amp are worthwhile all else is waste of money we all know that...just advertising dollars

Are you jesting?

 

[jlb]

no, not at all..isnt that the mantra here?

 

[DonR]

no, not at all..isnt that the mantra here?

Value for money is. There are $1000 DAC/amps that provide excellent value for money given their feature sets and measurements. Personally, I would also add extra points for build quality and product support.

 

[Trell]

no, not at all..isnt that the mantra here?

Not at all.

 

[Axo1989]

I don't know how the RCAs are mounted. They were kind of loose in there.

I know this was adequately refuted in another post, but it does point to suggestibility among the ASR cohort: as of this post almost 60 people were misled by a photo taken at an angle (as far as them "liking" that post indicates).

 

[Rednaxela]

I know this was adequately refuted in another post, but it does point to suggestibility among the ASR cohort: as of this post almost 60 people were misled by a photo taken at an angle (as far as them "liking" that post indicates).

Two issues were pointed out:

While measurements are good, I don't understand how a $3k product have such poor finish, not centered RCA plugs and the upper and lower casing parts are not perfectly aligned:

Was the second one also refuted?

 

[Axo1989]

While measurements are good, I don't understand how a $3k product have such poor finish, not centered RCA plugs and the upper and lower casing parts are not perfectly aligned:

View attachment 218929

I've quoted the next post in error, should be this one. Good point, I'll have to find the better photo and take a look.

Edit: ok, I started looking from the wrong end but I first saw it via @Sudin a page ago referring @nagster at post #143 (which shows connecters centred but apparently imperfect matching of top+bottom castings noticeable at the RHS although a little different to the image in the post from @thewas). So yes to refuting the first issue but but no to the second, I can't say the proportion of those likes applicable to each issue. A number of references to connectors alone in following posts but also mentions of both. I'm insufficiently obsessive to have done a tally.

 

[thewas]

I've quoted the next post in error, should be this one. Good point, I'll have to find the better photo and take a look.

Edit: ok, I started looking from the wrong end but I first saw it via @Sudin a page ago referring @nagster at post #143 (which shows connecters centred but apparently imperfect matching of top+bottom castings noticeable at the RHS although a little different to the image in the post from @thewas). So yes to refuting the first issue but but no to the second, I can't say the proportion of those likes applicable to each issue. A number of references to connectors alone in following posts but also mentions of both. I'm insufficiently obsessive to have done a tally.

Just because on one unit they are centred it doesn't automatically mean that there definitely cannot be a quality issue, especially as Amir also mentioned they are not strongly fixated. By the way even on the photo of the "better unit" the left plug doesn't look perfectly centred:

 

[Axo1989]

Ok, I started from the wrong end but we have @nagster at post #143

Just because on one unit they are centred it doesn't automatically mean that there definitely cannot be a quality issue, especially as Amir also mentioned they are not strongly fixated. By the way even on the photo of the "better unit" the left plug doesn't look perfectly centred:

View attachment 221484

I didn't say the photo is a better unit, I said it was a better angle. Drawing conclusions from an image is speculative.

 

[thewas]

Ok, I started from the wrong end but we have @nagster at post #143

And like I wrote above just because one unit has no problem that doesn't mean that another one definetely wouldn't have them too and even on that one the 6.3 mm plug is not centred.

I didn't say the photo is a better unit, I said it was a better angle. Drawing conclusions from an image is speculative.

The angle of Amirs photo cannot explain such large horizontal offset so I am quite sure it is not just a speculation, as a hobby photographer I am very careful before I write something like this.

 

[Jimster480]

Are you jesting?

Definitely

And like I wrote above just because one unit has no problem that doesn't mean that another one definetely wouldn't have them too and even on that one the 6.3 mm plug is not centred.


The angle of Amirs photo cannot explain such large horizontal offset so I am quite sure it is not just a speculation, as a hobby photographer I am very careful before I write something like this.

I mean it looks like they are not attached well. This has been noted before

 

[thewas]

I mean it looks like they are not attached well. This has been noted before

Yes, also Amir mentioned it and that is not acceptable for such an expensive device.

 

[Axo1989]

And like I wrote above just because one unit has no problem that doesn't mean that another one definetely wouldn't have them too and even on that one the 6.3 mm plug is not centred.

Looks like you are making the same mistake twice.

The angle of Amirs photo cannot explain such large horizontal offset so I am quite sure it is not just a speculation, as a hobby photographer I am very careful before I write something like this.

If course it can. Without measuring the device, conclusions based on images are speculative. Being "quite sure" makes no difference. Dimensionally perfect product photos require rigs with fine adjustment, suitable flat plane lenses and so on. I've used these. I'm sure you can try it yourself.

I also analyse photographic images as scientific evidence, professionally so I'm being as precise as possible in this discussion. The images we are discussing may indicate off-centre objects, but they may not. The conditions under which these images are produced are insufficiently controlled.

 

[thewas]

Looks like you are making the same mistake twice.

Nope, the image is taken very parallel to the device and again such an large horizontal relative offset cannot happen, a lens deformation cannot just offset the centre of connector and not the few millimetres casing radius around it, especially at such a similar depth.

I also analyse photographic images as scientific evidence, professionally so I'm being as precise as possible in this discussion.

So do I and I can see when an offset is possible from due to lens deformation and when not.

If you see it differently, that is fine absolutely for me, let's ask @amirm or the owner of the device, they can easily check, measure and confirm.