• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Review and Measurements of Chord Hugo 2 DAC and Headphone Amplifier

Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Messages
5
Likes
1
so I've opened up the review of the Hugo 2 and the Topping D50. After visually comparing the measurements, it makes me wonder when used strictly as a DAC, what would be an advantage of getting the Hugo 2 (or Chord Qutest assuming it measure the same) over the D50?

I've printed out the "understanding audio measurements" post. Now I'm off to do my reading assignment!
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
46
Likes
19
I do agree with some comments here that Qutest have to be tested instead Hugo2..
Hugo2 has integrated headphone amps (mobile realisation). It defenitally alternate measurement.
With Qutest you will be as close to the DAC as you can.. and this is what have to be measured to conclude about its DAC performance.
Please find time and do Qutest measurement instead.
It will gain many pros.. more correct results and (hopefully) proofs of what i just said.
But correct measurement of DAC and not amp is more important, at the end this is what your resource all about!!
Looking forward. Thank you.
 
Last edited:

Veri

Major Contributor
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
2,421
Likes
2,277
I do agree with some comments here that Qutest have to be tested instead Hugo2..
Hugo2 has integrated headphone amps (mobile realisation). It defenitally alternate measurement.
With Qutest you will be as close to the DAC as you can.. and this is what have to be measured to conclude about its DAC performance.
Please find time and do Qutest measurement instead.
I will gain many pros.. more correct results and (hopefully) proofs of what i just said.
But correct measurement of DAC and not amp is more important, at the end this is what your resource as about!!
Looking forward. Thank you.
The line out of a headamp DAC should give a very near similar idea of the performance. Qutest has better power supply that's it. It will not make for drastical magical improvement, but if someone wants to send Amir a Qutest I'm sure he would be willing to review it :) I think it's a little too expensive for Amir to buy one!
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
46
Likes
19
Now you wont often see me make subjective comments on sound quality. I do own a Chord Mojo and FWIW to my ears it does sound different to most DACs. Note I didnt necessarily say better. I dont hear "more" with this dac than others, but I think it does have a different tonality (which I like). I find most DACs quite boringly similar. Where this difference comes from is a difficult question to answer, more taps, the discrete FPGA output stage I dont know. Is this difference actually an indication of better or more accurate performance - not necessarily, the fact that it is different and sticks out from most dacs could indicate quite the opposite. What I dont like is Rob Watts claims. When he talks about noise floor modulation at -200 dB being audible and so on or that he doesnt blind test, the credibility goes down the toilet at that point.
From my point of view, what you describe is depth. And you are right, the particular thing of mojo and other Dacs from Chord, is that, you can hear this depth, and once you did, you realize that other way music is boring or the same as you say. Its very interesting. I had the same felling. Once you hear it, there is no way back. And its not about much numbers.. filters ec et. They are important. But more interesting is hoe it make your brain to reconstruct this micro transients into the depth of sound. Rob mention it in his talk.. and as i understand it's still not clear what parameter is better and need to be tuned. But the fact, you hear it, is there. I did small post regarding this here if you like.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/page-77#post-14607079
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
46
Likes
19
The line out of a headamp DAC should give a very near similar idea of the performance. Qutest has better power supply that's it. It will not make for drastical magical improvement, but if someone wants to send Amir a Qutest I'm sure he would be willing to review it :) I think it's a little too expensive for Amir to buy one!
I would argue regarding they similarity. Hugo2 is fail in my audition test and was on sale 2 days after due to the altered depth representation. I was suspect headphone amp influence, decided to test qutest instead. So, Qutest on my desk now... and it's stay. So don't claim they are the same sounding. Same DAC, yes.. but not sound the same to me. Please do AB audition and you will see what i mean. Thanks
 
Last edited:

Veri

Major Contributor
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
2,421
Likes
2,277
I would argue regarding they similarity. Hugo2 is fail in my audition test and was on sale 2 days after due to the altered depth representation. I was suspect headphone amp influence, decided to test qutest instead. So, Qutest on my desk now... and it's stay. So don't claim they are the same sounding. Same DAC, yes.. but not sound same to me. Please do AB audtion and you will see what i mean. Thanks
The only AB test I would accept as legitimate is one where another person is switching the inputs without you knowing nor seeing what it is you are listening to ;) it's all too easy for your brain to fool you really. The entire audio industry knows and fully exploits this.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
46
Likes
19
The only AB test I would accept as legitimate is one where another person is switching the inputs without you knowing nor seeing what it is you are listening to ;) it's all too easy for your brain to fool you really. The entire audio industry knows and fully exploits this.
Or you do this and try to be as honest and uninvolved as possable.. sometimes things you hear or not hear cant be missed. Agree, blind test is the best... but not always needed to realize that some DACs make your favorite songs sounds really bad.
 

Attachments

andreasmaaan

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
3,517
Likes
2,766
Or you do this and try to be as honest and uninvolved as possable.. sometimes things you hear or not hear cant be missed. Agree, blind test is the best... but not always needed to realize that some DACs make your favorite songs sounds really bad.
Unfortunately it's well established that merely trying to be uninvolved is not sufficient (even if you're honest!). The test really needs to be done blind.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
46
Likes
19
Unfortunately it's well established that merely trying to be uninvolved is not sufficient (even if you're honest!). The test really needs to be done blind.
Again, no doubts is better. But not always needed. I can easily ask my son to turn this switch on photo when if feels i need it, without see what he is doing. Something when you hear or not hear, you not need to do it blind ;)
 

andreasmaaan

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
3,517
Likes
2,766
Again, no doubts is better. But not always needed. I can easily ask my son to turn this switch on photo when if feels i need it, without see wha the doing. Something when you hear or not hear, you not need to do it blind ;)
You have it backwards ;)

Ask your son to test you blind. See if you can pick it reliably after 10+ trials. That’s the only way to know...
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
21,268
Likes
28,651
Location
Seattle Area

Valst

New Member
Joined
May 20, 2019
Messages
1
Likes
0
I’m newbie. Thank you for complicated reviews.
I owned Schiit yggy v1, yggy v2, LM 502CA, PS DS DSD and Chord hugo TT.
I see hugo TT is cleaner much more than yggy 1, yggy 1 is cleaner than yggy 2 (unfortunately).
BUT:
1) when playing some track, especially when there are more drums and contrabass or low band piano, hugo TT can not present the sound and yggy 1/2 sounds pretty. For example, it is very difficult to hear and separate sounds of drums within track “‘Moonlight on Spring River” from The DALI CD with Hugo TT (hugo TT must be much better than hugo 2).
2) Yggy 2 gives much better sound of high band and 3D image than yggy 1.
3) I invited 3 persons - musical experts, who are not familiar with the devices to do blind testing. They all say hugo TT is the worst and is further from natural sounds, yggy 2 is better than yggy 1. The reason: hugo TT is much more silent, but it has serious problem, the sound it give too long so that sound overleaps sound calling high total noise and make down the details of instrument sounds. It is easier to determine in low friquency band... Hugo TT is better for tracks with digital effects...
I have difficult situation!!!
 

THW

Active Member
Patreon Donor
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
296
Likes
393
“much more silent” this sounds like there is no attempt at level matching which makes that blind test useless.
 
Top Bottom