• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

CHORD Hugo TT2 Review (DAC & HP Amp)

Rate this DAC & HP Amp

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 82 22.5%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 126 34.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther

    Votes: 123 33.7%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 34 9.3%

  • Total voters
    365

Axo1989

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
2,804
Likes
2,806
Location
Sydney
Lol…well I’m not sure what you enjoyed about my post exactly, other than the opportunity to produce counter arguments with somewhat surgical precision :D

You make some good points, there’s definitely a couple of touchés in there, and I think I’m going to have to be lame and not offer such a thoughtful response in return—I think I’ve already beaten my original point to death. I’ve already made it somewhat hysterically clear that I have some resentments towards Chord for seducing me into an outlandish expense that I later regretted. And I’m fully aware that I chose to be seduced.

And that’s perhaps the only point on which I’d like to congenially disagree—the one about the stakes being low for reading product reviews. You’re an informed consumer with a serious investment in the science of audio—at the very least you’ve shrugged off cognitive bias denialism. Many folks, myself included in a not-so-distant past life, are not so enlightened, and can easily fall prey to false advertising. The vicious battles between this site and those such as Head-Fi are proof alone that reviews matter.

I can relate to the folks who get defensive about the brands they’ve invested in, because like many of them I made significant sacrifices to put together what I have, and I’ve felt that crumminess when someone questions your choices and leaves you wondering if you made a terrible mistake. Even with all I’ve learned, I still catch myself returning to the same reviews over and over to reassure myself that I’ve made the right decision about my headphones. I’m not supposed to admit that on these sites but it’s the truth.

I also can’t explain why one negative review, or a new product deemed superior to what I have, can suddenly make my music sound despairingly unsatisfying, when the day before I loved it. Speaking only for myself, music has been my most consuming passion all of my life, and the quality of the gear that I use to enjoy it is very personal—for me.

I hope that explains why I can’t help but take it personally when folks like Watts attempt to exploit my weaknesses with technical claptrap that suggests wisdom beyond my reach, promises of ecstatic pleasures that can only be demonstrated through ownership instead of data, and prices only within my grasp if I am willing to spend until it hurts. Being presented with evidence that his claims are unsubstantiated, at these price points at least, are almost a betrayal. I guess the options to cope with it are either denial or to get pissed. I’ve chosen both strategies in the past and frankly, they both suck. When he gets smug about it, I do kinda wish that his nose would light up so people can line up to take turns punching it—and once and for all, on this topic I promise I’m done…

Unfortunately I had some reminders of a client deadline come in as I was writing that post and had to cut things short, I intended less sharpness and more nuance toward the end.

Your reply wasn't lame though it actually addressed the bit that interested me: why is it personal.

You may be punishing yourself unduly. I reckon don't over-stress about sunk costs. If you bought a not-cheap Chord and it sounds good then there's nothing to worry about. Keep it and enjoy, or sell it, recoup and buy something more cost-effective and something else with the likely surplus.

I did study sound and editing early on so I probably avoided some traps of audiophilia but I'm perfectly capable of making shockingly poor financial decisions.

I take your point about the persuasive aspect of product reviews, however. I dismissed that too readily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GDK
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
I appreciate that you make that compromise in order to avoid capital outlay.
That is the issue. I don't consider it a compromise. It is just a smarter/more efficient way to get equipment to test than buy and sell them as CR does. These devices don't have much of anything to hand tune or hand pick. Variations are quite small. After doing this for three years across probably a hundred review, no one has been able to fault them.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
The quote you refer to was part of my response to @srkbear and specific to his Consumer Reports comparison, not a general/comprehensive overview of ASR method. There was no implication whatsoever, it was a direct factual statement (which you confirm, as "very close" meets the criteria "somewhere in-between"). How close can be argued, of course but that's outside scope of my comment, my interest and this thread.
We are identical to CR in the way we don't advertise, accept sponsorships, etc. Or afraid of telling the truth. To wit, I only recommend 1/3 of the products I test:

1662514916091.png


This independence and transparency in evaluation is what matters here. And what differentiates us from every other reviewer out there. There are people who are supporting their family on sites that are far smaller than us in reach. In that regard, I have left a ton of money on the table to achieve this goal. You can't just ignore that and just worry about product source where it is only a fraction of what is tested. And no issues have been raised properly as far as hand picking, bias, etc.
 

Axo1989

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
2,804
Likes
2,806
Location
Sydney
That is the issue. I don't consider it a compromise. It is just a smarter/more efficient way to get equipment to test than buy and sell them as CR does. These devices don't have much of anything to hand tune or hand pick. Variations are quite small. After doing this for three years across probably a hundred review, no one has been able to fault them.

It is a compromise, because ASR protocol doesn't obviate conflict of interest. However, you mitigate it by declaring interest, which (as I've said previously) is normal and satisfactory. What you are saying here is that you consider it to be a very sensible compromise. It may well be so.

You aren't discussing conflict of interest here though, but manufacturer cheating. That is a separate discussion. The conflict of interest arises because supply of review product is a material interest from which ASR benefits. In that respect you have admitted to non-publication of negative results for manufacturer-supplied devices. Again, you argue that this is very sensible. It may well be so.

We are identical to CR in the way we don't advertise, accept sponsorships, etc. Or afraid of telling the truth. To wit, I only recommend 1/3 of the products I test:

View attachment 229234

This independence and transparency in evaluation is what matters here. And what differentiates us from every other reviewer out there. There are people who are supporting their family on sites that are far smaller than us in reach. In that regard, I have left a ton of money on the table to achieve this goal. You can't just ignore that and just worry about product source where it is only a fraction of what is tested. And no issues have been raised properly as far as hand picking, bias, etc.

Yes, ASR is the identical to Consumer Reports, except where it is different. And (as I've said previously) my reply to @srkbear was limited in scope to highlighting a difference, not an evaluation of ASR method in toto.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Of course. The rule is mine to use or not. Question is, in the larger scheme of things, is it the right thing to do? Manufacturer gets penalized for offering a product for us to test.
I think not publishing the review if it's bad, when a manufacturer has sent you the device, is a good approach. No real downsides for the audio community as they probably wouldn't buy it if it wasn't measured (ASR folks anyway), and it means manufacturers are more likely to send you stuff. It would be a bit boring if all your reviews were proving the product was good/excellent, so it wouldn't be good if you got all your stuff to test from manufacturers, but you get your equipment to test from other sources too, so there's not a danger of that happening.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
The conflict of interest arises because supply of review product is a material interest from which ASR benefits.
What benefit? I have so much stuff to review from members and things I buy myself. Life would go on with or without these product loans which make up a small percentage of what I test.
In that respect you have admitted to non-publication of negative results for manufacturer-supplied devices.
How is this factor? What would you do with the products that CR doesn't test? Demand that they test everything?
 

JSmith

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
5,153
Likes
13,213
Location
Algol Perseus
It becomes frustrating to read posts constantly calling into question what is tested, why, how etc. Members and other readers should simply be happy that someone goes out of their way using their own time and often expense to provide this free data here at ASR. Maybe those people should consider investing in an APx555 and providing a similar free service using their own time.


JSmith
 

Axo1989

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
2,804
Likes
2,806
Location
Sydney
What benefit? I have so much stuff to review from members and things I buy myself. Life would go on with or without these product loans which make up a small percentage of what I test.

How is this factor? What would you do with the products that CR doesn't test? Demand that they test everything?

Now you've disconnected a couple of sentences from a paragraph that simply explained what conflict of interest refers to, and turned it into an argument. There's nothing to be gained from that approach. I'll leave you to it.
 

Axo1989

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
2,804
Likes
2,806
Location
Sydney
It becomes frustrating to read posts constantly calling into question what is tested, why, how etc. Members and other readers should simply be happy that someone goes out of their way using their own time and often expense to provide this free data here at ASR. Maybe those people should consider investing in an APx555 and providing a similar free service using their own time.

If you are including my recent posts in that comment, note that I didn't do that. I responded to a specific statement and context.

Another poster responded and in the process launched or expanded several lines of argument about sourcing devices to test. When those arguments fell into misunderstandings of straightforward technical legal terms I corrected them. I made no argument about what should be tested or how.

Think for a moment, if a poster makes an argument here which falls into misunderstandings of technical electronic engineering terms, they will be similarly corrected. Apart from greater familiarity with one area of expertise compared to another, there is no difference.
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
Now you've disconnected a couple of sentences from a paragraph that simply explained what conflict of interest refers to, and turned it into an argument. There's nothing to be gained from that approach. I'll leave you to it.
I'm legally qualified and quite accustomed to reading complex ideas, especially around concepts such as conflict if interest. I'm sorry to say that if you have a practical point it's unintelligible to me. To then purport that your own failure to articulate anything of practical substance is a failing by @amirm is a bit churlish.
 

Axo1989

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
2,804
Likes
2,806
Location
Sydney
I'm legally qualified and quite accustomed to reading complex ideas, especially around concepts such as conflict if interest. I'm sorry to say that if you have a practical point it's unintelligible to me. To then purport that your own failure to articulate anything of practical substance is a failing by @amirm is a bit churlish.

The original point was that there are differences between protocols on conflict of interest between ASR and Consumer Reports, which was a minor observation in the context of my response to @srkbear's post. There's nothing more to it. It isn't a complex idea. Arguing that this is insufficiently practical or substantial is a straw man.
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,149
Location
London
The subjective vested interest groups desperately grasp anything, no matter how ridiculous to undermine Amir’s work.
Receiving components directly from a manufacturer can either be good or bad ( cherry picking)
From an actual customer, how do we know that unit hasn’t been broken, poorly modified etc etc.
Amir Purchasing the equipment or having members send in their own equipment is imho pretty much ideal.
Keith
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
The original point was that there are differences between protocols on conflict of interest between ASR and Consumer Reports, which was a minor observation in the context of my response to @srkbear's post. There's nothing more to it. It isn't a complex idea. Arguing that this is insufficiently practical or substantial is a straw man.
Well, it's impractical in the sense that you don't say what should happen as result, and then imply that you need to end the conversation there because Amir can't see the elephant that you say is in the room. I simply don't see what possible real world conflict of interest arises from the ASR approach; at the end of the day the results are offered to be read on their own terms with all of the working out shown. There's no more to it than that.
 

Axo1989

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
2,804
Likes
2,806
Location
Sydney
Well, it's impractical in the sense that you don't say what should happen as result, and then imply that you need to end the conversation there because Amir can't see the elephant that you say is in the room. I simply don't see what possible real world conflict of interest arises from the ASR approach; at the end of the day the results are offered to be read on their own terms with all of the working out shown. There's no more to it than that.

So you don't understand conflict of interest and you don't understand straw man?

The former arises by definition in the circumstances described. It's mitigated by a declaration of interest, making the process transparent. There's nothing that needs to be done.

The latter arises when you assert and argue implications not made by me in the first instance. Go for it if you must, but you won't engage my interest indefinitely.

Elephants like straw I suppose. :)

The subjective vested interest groups desperately grasp anything, no matter how ridiculous to undermine Amir’s work. ...

And others just like clutching at them.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
I'm legally qualified and quite accustomed to reading complex ideas, especially around concepts such as conflict if interest.

Well how about weighing in instead of telling us how qualified in the area you are and saying very little?

The biggest issue IMO with a site like this proclaiming independence and objectivity is the provision of products supplied as review samples with no expectation of the return of said items. It has been brought up by me (and others) years ago with the suggestion of a live register of 'free/gifted' products so people reading those 'unbiased' reviews can familiarize themselves with any gifts/samples that preceded those reviews.

Anything else is not transparent, and neither does a vague 'it was provided by the company' quote. That does not describe whether the item is on temporary loan, optional return, should be destroyed after review, is essentially a gift, or other possibilities.

What Amir does with the stuff is anyone's guess. He has been opaque in the past and continues to be so. Some brands clearly would like to curry favour one way or another, but I am reasonably confident things are above board. Clarification however is needed.

Our school teachers are unable to accept any gifts valued at over $50 without declaring the gift and surrendering it to the school, lest their gift be perceived as somehow advantaging their child in some way.

Our local councillors (all of them) have ongoing declarations (where the total is >$500) available for anyone to read.
1662605678252.png


There are numerous items reviewed here with considerable market values. What happens to those products? Are they sold to run the web hosting? Do the moderators get their pick in lieu of a salary? Are there 100 Topping boxes stashed in an offsite storage facility, or are they simply donated to the Good Will? Nobody knows.

Transparency is a highly desirable characteristic in HiFi. I'd like to see more transparency in relation to this subject.
 

HarmonicTHD

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 18, 2022
Messages
3,326
Likes
4,829
Well how about weighing in instead of telling us how qualified in the area you are and saying very little?

The biggest issue IMO with a site like this proclaiming independence and objectivity is the provision of products supplied as review samples with no expectation of the return of said items. It has been brought up by me (and others) years ago with the suggestion of a live register of 'free/gifted' products so people reading those 'unbiased' reviews can familiarize themselves with any gifts/samples that preceded those reviews.

Anything else is not transparent, and neither does a vague 'it was provided by the company' quote. That does not describe whether the item is on temporary loan, optional return, should be destroyed after review, is essentially a gift, or other possibilities.

What Amir does with the stuff is anyone's guess. He has been opaque in the past and continues to be so. Some brands clearly would like to curry favour one way or another, but I am reasonably confident things are above board. Clarification however is needed.

Our school teachers are unable to accept any gifts valued at over $50 without declaring the gift and surrendering it to the school, lest their gift be perceived as somehow advantaging their child in some way.

Our local councillors (all of them) have ongoing declarations (where the total is >$500) available for anyone to read.
View attachment 229388

There are numerous items reviewed here with considerable market values. What happens to those products? Are they sold to run the web hosting? Do the moderators get their pick in lieu of a salary? Are there 100 Topping boxes stashed in an offsite storage facility, or are they simply donated to the Good Will? Nobody knows.

Transparency is a highly desirable characteristic in HiFi. I'd like to see more transparency in relation to this subject.
Aside that you don’t have any facts and only allegations, which I always find problematic when questioning other people integrity.

Do a quick estimate - look at how many products Amir reviewed in the lets say last 6 months or so which were sent by manufacturers. How much money would Amir make by selling those (assuming the worst of your allegations)?

Most likely he would make more money flipping burgers (and there isn’t anything wrong with burger flipping).

So how would these (alleged) earnings become relevant in his judgement?

I think you are on thin ice here as much as I admire you otherwise technical expertise.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
What Amir does with the stuff is anyone's guess.
You don't have to guess. Just ask. There is a mountain of them here. Boxes stacked as high as you can see.

The number that have left can be counted on one hand. I have gifted one to someone who sent me something to test that he didn't have to. I have given one to my son. I have sold a couple to people who really wanted them bad. The money has gone in the general fund. The other 50+ is here just in case I need to re-test something. And the fact that I am terrible at selling things (have hardly ever sold anything in my life in used market).

There are numerous items reviewed here with considerable market values.
Like what exactly? Expensive stuff has been member products or returned to manufacturers.

I have bought a ton of products out of my own money. They too are sitting here collecting dust.

Really, this is quite of an out of line post. I can use yet another DAC or HP amp like a hole in the head. They come, they get tested, and put on the shelf.

Oh you want me to auction it off to you? Well, I don't have the time for that sort of thing. When I do, you will hear about it. Until then, please cut out the innuendos.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Do the moderators get their pick in lieu of a salary?
No moderator has asked for one even though I have offered them. Heaven knows they deserve to get them. Even the web developer for the Review Index refused to accept a unit I had, which he was going to buy. These are honorable and way above board people. It is shameful to see you accusing them of such.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Are there 100 Topping boxes stashed in an offsite storage facility, or are they simply donated to the Good Will? Nobody knows.
Lack of knowledge is not knowledge. Yes, there are nearly 100 boxes sitting on shelves alone:
Gear that is here.jpg


There are as many stashed in the attic and a bunch of speakers piled up in the garage -- most of which I have bought. You happy now?

There are days that I wonder why I do this..... :(
 
Top Bottom