Chord Hugo 2 Review (Portable DAC & HP Amp)

[bennetng]

Measured differences are shown in another review published much earlier, regardless of audibility.

Review and Measurements of Chord Hugo 2 DAC and Headphone Amplifier

This is a detailed measurement and review of the Chord Hugo 2 DAC. It retails for $2,700 in US. The unit I had in for measurements was from an ex-Microsoft colleague and recent forum member. I only had an hour or so with it and it is now returned. This is an odd looking box to be sure...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[raif71]

Exactly, but this programming is very expensive and far exceeding the cost of the FPGA, which was my point.

Speaking as a software developer but not for FPGA.

Yeah, the fpga synthesis software is quite expensive too... not only the FPGA chip... for example if Chord uses Synplify from Synopsys

Synplicity Enhances Synplify Pro Product to Overcome IP Integration Barriers

Synplicity Enhances Synplify Pro Product to Overcome IP Integration Barriers

www.design-reuse.com

This link is from the year 2000, sorry this is what I could find on fpga synthesis software pricing.

 

[bennetng]

Some other reviews with frequency response measurement using log scale x axis at 10Hz-20kHz with about +/-3 to 5dB of y axis:

 

[amirm]

Measured differences are shown in another review published much earlier, regardless of audibility.

Frequency response measurements for DACs does not show what happens post fs/2. For filter analysis, we need to see past that point and hence the use of FFT/noise for signal.

 

[xbalkugqw]

I can understand the criticisms of the Hugo 2. On the other hand, I would be happy if someone would recommend a desktop/portable DAC/AMP up to 2000€ that can subjectively deliver better sound performance.

I have tested this myself:

FiiO K9 Pro ESS
iFi neo iDSD
RME ADI-2 DAC FS

And the Hugo 2 sounds overall noticeably better to me.

Oh well: I would also be very happy about a similar recommendation up to 4000€ as a comparison to the Hugo TT2.

 

[Jimbob54]

I can understand the criticisms of the Hugo 2. On the other hand, I would be happy if someone would recommend a desktop/portable DAC/AMP up to 2000€ that can subjectively deliver better sound performance.

I have tested this myself:

FiiO K9 Pro ESS
iFi neo iDSD
RME ADI-2 DAC FS

And the Hugo 2 sounds overall noticeably better to me.

Oh well: I would also be very happy about a similar recommendation up to 4000€ as a comparison to the Hugo TT2.

Not sure how anyone can give you such a subjective recommendation. We dont know what you hear in the Hugo 2 that you like or how you would perceive any other such item. Most here would stand by the view that you really shouldnt hear a noticeable difference between the excellent performing RME and the Hugo given they both measure well.

But have a look at the review index for DAC/amps for the recommended items. But ensure you do level matched and if possible blind comparisons between them.

 

[maxxevv]

I can understand the criticisms of the Hugo 2. On the other hand, I would be happy if someone would recommend a desktop/portable DAC/AMP up to 2000€ that can subjectively deliver better sound performance.

I have tested this myself:

FiiO K9 Pro ESS
iFi neo iDSD
RME ADI-2 DAC FS

And the Hugo 2 sounds overall noticeably better to me.

Oh well: I would also be very happy about a similar recommendation up to 4000€ as a comparison to the Hugo TT2.

Were all of them reviewd with the exact same voltage output values?

 

[xbalkugqw]

Were all of them reviewd with the exact same voltage output values?

Not sure how anyone can give you such a subjective recommendation. We dont know what you hear in the Hugo 2 that you like or how you would perceive any other such item. Most here would stand by the view that you really shouldnt hear a noticeable difference between the excellent performing RME and the Hugo given they both measure well.

But have a look at the review index for DAC/amps for the recommended items. But ensure you do level matched and if possible blind comparisons between them.

I simply connected the units to the PC via Toslink and compared them in A/B using the HD800S with my test songs.

The Hugo 2 generally delivered better soundstage, imaging, definition, clarity and vocals compared to the competition. The RME was pretty close, but not at the same level - unfortunately. Of course, I made sure that the volume was the same. I brought hours with these comparisons.

I really wanted these units to be better because I wanted something stationary and that cost less. But I unfortunately had to admit to myself that the Hugo 2 was subjectively better.

 

[Jimbob54]

I simply connected the units to the PC via Toslink and compared them in A/B using the HD800S with my test songs.

The Hugo 2 generally delivered better soundstage, imaging, definition, clarity and vocals compared to the competition. The RME was pretty close, but not at the same level - unfortunately.

I really wanted these units to be better because I wanted something stationary and that cost less. But I unfortunately had to admit to myself that the Hugo 2 was subjectively better.

Well look at the TT2 then- I am sure if you audition that in the same way you will probably find that has even more of the qualities you like.

 

[xbalkugqw]

Well look at the TT2 then- I am sure if you audition that in the same way you will probably find that has even more of the qualities you like.

Weil, I have actually already done it: bought, compared with the Hugo 2 and returned the Hugo 2 for the TT2.

I may have 14 days to find an alternative to the TT2 that sounds even better and is preferably also cheaper. I will gladly accept recommendations!

 

[Azathoth]

Ahh one of my earlier experiences of audiophilia back in the day. It was bulky, quite heavy and I was more into DAPs anyways. Sounded great to me, but I think I was more interested in the buttons wondering why it needed to be spherical. I remember it is named Hugo because it supposed to be with you wherever Hugo. Why did I remember that tidbit.

 

[Rednaxela]

I remember it is named Hugo because it supposed to be with you wherever Hugo.

Nice!

You got me puzzling on the name Dave now.

The best Dave made so far?

 

[Jimbob54]

Weil, I have actually already done it: bought, compared with the Hugo 2 and returned the Hugo 2 for the TT2.

I may have 14 days to find an alternative to the TT2 that sounds even better and is preferably also cheaper. I will gladly accept recommendations!

Do you use any software EQ? By far and a way the best way to get better sound from your kit- not hardware upgrades.

 

[Jimbob54]

Nice!

You got me puzzling on the name Dave now.

The best Dave made so far?

I only wish I was joking- but

Digital to Analogue Veritas in Extremis

 

[xbalkugqw]

Do you use any software EQ? By far and a way the best way to get better sound from your kit- not hardware upgrades.

No, I want everything works out-of-the-box- also eventually for console gaming later.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

96 kHz? Where did that come from? I always run my tests at 44.1 kHz. I have no doubt if I zoom in 1000 times something may be different. But that is not consequential in the slightest. As it is, the graph is zoomed, covering just a few kilohertz on both sides of the transition band.

Thanks for replying.
OK then 48kHz, this is to shift the brickwall filter away a bit, to see the effects of the filters.
See this:

It is zoomed in.
At any rate, I do agree with you that inclusion of such filters is a gimmick, whoever does it. Can not be heard, on Hugo2 or my DX7 pro, even though the filters on the Topping vary much more than Chord's.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

You mean I should have a setup that none of you have when connecting this DAC to your computer? I don't think so! Per your own note, we are able to detect lack of good USB isolation here. Also note that plenty of desktop DACs lack galvanic USB isolation but show no dependency to USB noise.

Fair comment, yes it is true, Chord portable DACs are sensitive to ground loop noise, coming in from one end and exiting from another.
This is primarily a Transportable device (Chord's description), running on batteries with its main job, driving headphones.
As a desktop DAC, it would still be excellent with a proper USB isolator (such as HS-01) or TOSLINK.
During the past 5+ years since it was released, others have launched a few models, Hugo2 still competes well.

 

[AudioSceptic]

The Qutest is smallish, though bigger than the Hugo, but definitely not a portable DAC owing to its size and the lack of a battery. I suspect you may be thinking of the Mojo.
I have a Qutest ( though am about to sell it ) and It is an excellent DAC. I don't know about the Hugo, but build quality of the Qutest is excellent. I also have the extremely well measuring Topping DX3 Pro and, while I like it a great deal, the Qutest is in another class ( as it should be ).

You can tell them apart in a proper blind test?

 

[AudioSceptic]

This... the PS Audio DirectStream DAC is obscenely priced for what it is... then again, so is their whole lineup of below avg, but audiophool-targeted items.

Don't forget the TotalDAC <https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...and-measurements-of-totaldac-d1-six-dac.8192/>!

 

[bidn]

I remember it is named Hugo because it supposed to be with you wherever Hugo.

Thank you, very interesting.

How about also explaining the acronym like this?:

Hoggish
Ugly
Greedy
On the take

This might better correspond to the ugly, childish and unpractical design, moderate performance, low end build quality (connectors and capacitors) yet huge price.