Chord Hugo 2

Totally and completely. The 1Z is an amazing piece of kit and the best DAP I know of by far. My AK100/Mojo/CV5 stack was very good, but after listening to (and then buying) the 1Z there was no going back. Also the battery on the 1Z is awesome and you don't have to worry about charging it after every use like I did the various elements of the stack (where the Mojo was usually the first to run out of juice). If you can afford it, then go for it, and remember that to get the most out of it you'll need to use the 4.4mm balanced output to your HPs/IEMs. Cheers

 

Anyone interested in a potential group buy please pm me. Have a great weekend, Lou.

 

@Lou Casadonte started a Hugo 2 group buy thread, cross posting here in case anyone is interested.

 

I was trying to find this thread, thanks, Please PM me if interested.

 

Tonight only I have all three relevant Chord products. Anyone want me to test anything? I've got Utopia, Dita Dreams, and a big playlist...

I'll only have Hugo 2 for another day. And the Mojo isn't mine.

Spoiler: (intentionally) over pretentious proof

Because I have a feeling Chord fans love too much blur... I also would guess they're Mac fans (that's not even mine lol)

Edit: Initial impressions are that Mojo... Changes normal audio output to the Chord style almost. It's more appealing than my iPad Pro output without being all that super superior in the detail aspect. It sounds a bit warmer and easier to listen to. Cymbals sound wrong.

Hugo 2 corrects almost all the flaws of Mojo imo and is quite a good sound. Cymbals sound much more like I expect. Bass is really really big on my Dita Dreams but without the muddiness of Mojo. Do I enjoy it? Yes. Am I keeping it? No. It's really pretty great for iems but the cost + size means it's not really a good value still... It does drive Utopia pretty dang well though. Compared to Yggydrasil + Raggy Hugo 2 sounds warmer than the Yggdrasil did. Yggdrasil had more detail as well as it traded blows much better with DAVE, though DAVE sounded far better with bass to my ears (using Focal Kantas and Focal Utopia... So could be Focal related).

DAVE is fairly clearly superior to the lesser Chord products. It keeps Hugos tonality but perfects it. On Utopia really makes well recorded tracks come as close to alive as anything I've heard. It's a really really good combo with Utopia. If you're on a budget (well still a fairly high one) I will say Hugo 2 does sound closer to it than I expected.

 

I´ve got a demo loaner Hugo 2 here for the weekend. No expectations really, but keeping an open mind.

Background: used to own a Mojo, but found that while it was pretty good as a portable it simply wasn´t all that for desktop use. The USB input in particular was noisy and glitchy, not to mention the SQ took a big dive compared to when driven from mobile battery powered gear. It also eventually broke down (had it t connected to mains power 24/7) and had to be replaced by warranty.

Also briefly auditioned the Hugo 1 once and actually preferred the Mojo with most headphones. As for the DAVE, auditioned it briefly too with the HD 800 S and I have to admit my first impression was simply that it´s the best source I´ve ever heard. Can´t lie, different league than the Mojo/Hugo 1 - extremely real sounding with zero harshness. The price is obviously another question though.

As for the Chord marketing, yeah it´s hyped to the max so you have to discard a lot of what you read, but they are a commercial company after all. Most companies in high end audio wish they were as good as Chord at marketing. If I worked there I´d do the same, so I can´t really blame them although I do understand the backlash. The marketing hype isn´t all bad though, for example having the lead designer reply to hundreds and hundreds of questions on Head-Fi is a good thing in my book (of course it´s also marketing work at the same time).

Some non-SQ related initial impressions:

- Much better placement of inputs, actually desktop friendly this time
- Volume scrolling button works so much nicer than the volume up and down buttons on Mojo
- Inputs etc. are now marked with text, much less guesswork included
- Remote works great and really helps with the sometimes obscure orb interface
- It seems to have four filter options, one of which is apparently more or less the same as in the Mojo
- Full size headphone jack and a 3.5 mm one are a nice combination
- No hiss on my Sennheiser IE 800 S even on loud gain, promising for IEMs
- Comes with a power supply this time and apparently goes into desktop mode (draws less power and protects the battery) after 24 hours of being connected to a charger
- Chord´s drivers include an ASIO driver and seem to work fine
- The dim button on the remote is neat (turns off the orb colors almost entirely)
- Very small, disappears on your desktop
- Runs quite warm, but not as hot as Mojo
- I´d consider this a desktop DAC that´s easy to move around if needed, but not a portable
- I kinda like the Chord design (obviously very subjective), but if I could get it cheaper without it I´d have no problems in not havin git

I´ll be updating this post throughout the weekend.

Update 1: Time listened ~6 hours, including a couple hours of A/B vs. HDV 820.

In the beginning something sounded "off", as if my brain had issues adjusting to the sound. It wasn´t a traditional "digital glare", but more like something just made me feel uncomfortable and slightly fatigued. This disappeared entirely after 3-4 hours of listening and I can´t really find it anymore. Note that this did not happen with DAVE. Odd. Going to be interesting to see if it´s there again tomorrow or not.

What I can say at this point is that there is a "Chord sound" that your brain gets used to (or doesn´t). By this I don´t mean the obvious thing that every brand has a house sound, but more like there is a very unique one in this that is clearly more different than usual. What I´m trying to say is that if this house sound is your dream I can understand how one can become devoted "converts" and eventually mostly just own Chord gear.

More later, but here are some random early thoughts:

- I´m sure there´s plenty of good competition in this price range, but it definitely doesn´t sound mid-fi.
- Either the HDV 820 pushes the mids of the HD 800 S out a bit or the Hugo 2 is more accurate in showing their mids as slightly recessed. I´m starting to think it´s showing how HDV 820 is deliberately tuned to improve HD 800 S tonal balance.
- Shines with well recorded acoustic/vocals/classical/jazz ("traditional audiophile stuff") materials and makes nasty recordings outright painful with the incisive filter. The HDV 820 plays nicer with less than perfect records.
- Very good for low volume listening, more specifics later though (I rarely listen at loud volumes).
- Crossfeed works awesome on HD 800 S, it really pulls the sensation of having the singer kinda float in front of you in many recordings (first time I´m actually thinking about starting to use crossfeed). Maybe the HD 800 S imaging is just a good match for crossfeed in general? It doesn´t sound anywhere near as convincing on HD 660 S. Perhaps I should experiment with software crossfeed on HDV 820...
- Fantastic with IE 800 S as expected from a somewhat portable oriented device/low output impedance (HDV 820 is simply an impedance mismatch/made for high ohm cans).
- Yes, it´s very expensive and the margins (bill of materials simply can´t be very high) must be abnormally good even for an industry like high end audio.

Update 2: Time listened 12+ hours (mostly on HD 800 S), not that much A/B vs. HDV 820 anymore.

Guess what? The "off" sound was there again in the morning, but this time it went away after a few songs already. In the beginning it took several hours. I guess my brain is getting used to the sound. I´ve also started to gravitate towards the green filter (incisive with HF roll-off) and no longer feel like using the warm filters. I suspect that for some this brain adjustment just never happens for whatever reason (these things are very subjective) and for those the sound will always sound very "off". And if you are an R2R sound enthusiast, this simply probably isn´t your cup of tea. The presentation is the polar opposite of that kind of sound.

Time for more in depth stream of consciousness impressions. Here it goes:

- The sound is fast, hyper detailed and ethereal. A lot of microdetail or to use the word popularized here, plankton. As for dynamics the microdynamics are fantastic, but macrodynamics are somewhat lacking. I´ve never heard a battery powered DAC/amp that has good macrodynamics and while this is better at that than some others I´ve heard, it´s still not as good as what good mains powered heavier desktop gear can pull off.
- Soundstage isn´t bad, but it´s not the widest out there (loses clearly against balanced HDV 820).
- If I´m stressed or tired I´ll gravitate towards the warm filters, but in usually the green filter sounds the best/most balanced for me.
- It´s not a portable DAVE, but it´s not a Mojo or Hugo 1 either. Maybe in three years we´ll see a Hugo approach the current DAVE as the Xilinx FPGA tech goes from the current 28 nm in Hugo 2 to something like 10 nm (the latest Apple SOC is already using this) or 16 nm (already quite mainstream).
- This has the best instrument/vocals separation I´ve ever heard, but I´m not sure if it´s a result of accuracy or a somewhat hyped sound.
- It will ruthlessly show if a record has a higher than usual noise floor and/or clicks in the treble. Think of this like the film grain filters used in Netflix Marvel shows: it looks good on LCD screens with slower pixel shift, but on fast OLED the effect doesn´t suit them at all. This is very apparent in songs that use these kinds of effects purposely for artistic reasons.
- The Hugo 2 is now in desktop mode and runs only somewhat warm (less hot than yesturday). It´s nowhere near as hot as the Mojo in desktop use.
- It´s more ruthless at revealing lossy music than the HDV 820. Spotify 320 kbs is no problem with HDV 820, but no thank you on the Hugo 2.
- My guess is that these are a good match with Focal headphones. Their fantastic transient response is probably pretty awesome with this sound signature. May be too vivid though?
- As expected great with IEMs (tried with Sennheiser IE 800 S and HIFIMAN RE-600); always perfect volume balance and better with HD 660 S than HDV 820 too (the 40 ohm output impedance is probably a bit too much for the 150 ohm Sennheisers).
- HDV 820 has better tonal balance on HD 800 S (and mostly due to this I´d say most will prefer HD 800 series out of HDV 820), but Hugo 2 is probably more accurate in showing its flaws: midrange recessed, highs a bit too emphasized. Hugo 2 obviously matches well with way more headphones than the HDV 820 (which is a HD 800 series synergy specialist and extremely good at that).
- Build quality on this unit is flawless (I´ve seen some pictures online where the orb lights can be seen through the two piece construction cracks; no such issues here).
- I wish Chord didn´t use microUSB connectors. They are really fragile. Hoping to see USB type C in the next one.
- The Hugo 2 sound signature makes a good argument for those saying 16 bit / 44 kHz is enough and high res isn´t really needed.
- If you are listening to extremely expensively produced material these will show that work in all its glory. Example: Michael Jacksons Invincible sounds really good with this and I previously never liked the album (felt overproduced).
- The form factor is so nice. I´m more or less done with separates and want my electronics to be single unit and disappear on my desk. No 10 kg boxes stacked on top of each other anymore. This is obviously 100% subjective.
- If I won in the lottery/had enough income that it wouldn´t matter much to put 10k into something I´d likely buy a DAVE with the Blu and call it a day/quit reading about new source gear. Price/performance definitely wouldn´t be the best, but such is diminishing returns. Based on my previous DAVE audition at a store, it plays in another league than the Hugo 2.
- I would prefer a cheaper housing/more traditional controls (along with a lower price) instead of the light orb things, but I understand that from a business perspective this is a brilliant move as it gives their products a unique look.

If you´re interested in the Hugo 2, I´d suggest getting a loaner for several days. Should be easy considering how popular they are / how many dealers sell Chord gear. Give it some time. Don´t buy it blind as the sound is not something I can universally recommend (not much in audio is except something like the HD 600) - it has enough of a house sound (and a unique one at that) that you have to check if it´s for you or not. If you´re looking for warm and euphonic this isn´t it.

All in all I´m inclined to say that Chord´s success definitely isn´t just due to hype/extremely well done marketing. When there´s smoke there´s usually fire. Sure their stuff is very expensive, but Rob Watts and his FPGA tech is legit to me based on this experience. I just wish Chord would be faster with moving their TOTL sound into lower (for Chord) price ranges though.

Update 3: Hours listened, lost count... Switched to testing HD 660 S. Looks like my brain is now accustomed to the sound as I don´t get the initial "off" feeling any more.

- Tighter bass than on HDV 820, not a surprise considering the non-ideal damping factor with the ~40 ohm output impedance on the Sennheiser amp.
- Less of a difference than with HD 800 S; HD 660 S just doesn´t scale anywhere near as much.
- Crossfeed effect isn´t anywhere near as pronounced or enjoyable as on HD 800 S.

Nothing new to report really. It´s a good product for my preferences. I´ll seriously consider switching to one if I decide to get the Focal Clears. Another route would be to just wait for the HD 820 and get that instead (I´m still expecting it to be an improvement over HD 800 S). Decisions, decisions...

Update 4: Last but not least, now perhaps the most important test. Switch back to your familiar setup (HDV 820 & HD 800 S) and see what you´re missing (if anything).

- No adjustment period whatsoever with HDV 820 (doesn´t sound "off" in any way).
- Hugo 2 has better microdynamics, but worse macrodynamics (lacks scale/authority in comparison).
- Resolution and instrument separation are better on the Hugo 2.
- HD 800 S has better tonality (more focus on midrange, less emphasis on treble) on HDV 820, you can see it´s been voiced for for this headphone series in particular. I´d guess it´s also a very good match for the Beyerdynamic high ohm stuff with a somewhat similar tonality.
- HDV 820 is smoother, more liquid and highlights clicks/pops/mistakes less (which might mean Hugo 2 is hyping things up or is simply more accurate - I don´t know).
- HDV 820 is more cat friendly as it never runs warm at all (my cat attempted to sleep on top of the Mojo all the time, this might happen with Hugo 2 as well).
- Spotify sounds good again.
- Grabs my attention less, more easy listening (not necessarily a bad thing, depends).

Still happy with the HDV 820 (it has better synergy with the HD 800 S which is the headphone I´m using 95% of the time). As I said previously I might switch to a Hugo 2, but it all depends on if I jump on the Focal train or not. Luckily I won´t have to decide anytime soon as I can´t see much of a point in getting the Clears right now until it´s clear what the Clear Professionals are about.

It was great to try the Hugo 2 though, impressive technology. It didn´t instantly turn me into a "Chord devotee", but I can understand why it´s popular (there´s a lot more to it than just hype/marketing).

Update 5: Post cleaned up/some stuff rewritten.

 

I will jump in and add my impressions. I've been using the Hugo 2 for several months now. I received the device directly from Chord as long as I provide photo material. So if you follow their Facebook or Instagram, chances are high the photo was shot by me.



Before that, I used the original Chord Hugo for three years. That device absolutely knocked me off the floor. The performance and functionality of the original Hugo was unthinkable for a portable device at that time. It was definitely my favorite source. Some argued - especially when compared to the Mojo - that the Hugo sounded bright. I disagree. The frequency response was flat and the sound was deep and detailed. Very much to my liking and I preferred it as a source for almost every other device I got my hands on until the Hugo 2 arrived.

I have to say the Hugo 2 is better than the original Hugo in every way. But this time the novelty is gone. Does that make it an overpriced desktop DAC or is it a totally bonkers portable device? I would have loved to see Chord going in the other direction and actually cutting costs to make the original Hugo more affordable. Instead they added on top and increased the price. Since I can use the Hugo 2 at no costs, I shouldn't be grouching. But from a consumer's perspective, the Hugo 2 right now is less attractive than the original Hugo was three years ago.



Now, if price is not an issue, the Hugo 2 is very good. I consider myself more of a pro-user than a high-ender. Pro as in using audio gear as tools to enjoy music. I like to do ABX'ing and I like very functional approaches. I think the frequency response is the most important factor in an audio chain and if a headphone is strongly colored, I don't even see a reason to start a discussion about THD in ten-times lower than audible levels. That does not mean I haven't trained my ears to listen carefully, but DA filters and 49k taps are not such a huge selling point for me. I have seen some impression on Head-Fi by users who glorify the WTA filter. For me, it's merely a small bonus.

For my desktop system, I have absolutely fallen in love with the RME ADI-2 Pro. I have saved a preset for my Oppo PM-3 and no matter what source, the audio quality is superb and the combo makes it really difficult to justify investing in any more expensive gear. (The new and cheaper RME ADI-2 DAC would suit my needs even better, but it wasn't available at the time.) My alternative setup would be to load up JRiver and use convolution for the Hugo 2. But that is only possible when I'm using my Mac and excludes Apple Music. I also switch a lot between USB, iPhone and S/PDIF, so there's that.

Anyway, if I want to listen to headphones/ IEM/ CIEM just the way they are, the Hugo 2 is great. It has much lower noise than the original Hugo, but I can pick up very light background hiss with the ProPhile 8 and qdc Gemini. Nowhere to a level where it would be distracting or brighten the background; just saying, very careful listeners can pick it up. As a plus, the output impedance is very low (0.03 Ω) and that is great for an IEM-addict like me. The sound signature is very reminiscent of the original Hugo. I listened to the Mojo several times, but I never had it at home for a lengthier period, but the Hugo 2 sounds more transparent to me and closer to the old Hugo or Hugo TT than the Mojo.

Crossfeed seems to be the same as on the Hugo 1. I usually have it activated on minimum level unless the recording is special somehow. I mostly listen to ripped CDs and the DA filters don't do much for me. I think they are more prominent with HD files. For me, gear should most importantly sound great with the red book standard. The Hugo 2 definitely fulfills that, but for a very high price.



I really dig the design of the Hugo 2. I don't know if the looks were designed in-house or outsourced to a professional service provider. But whoever it was, he/she/they did a great job! The way the look-through glass is not perfectly round or the slightly oval shape around the button proves that somebody knew exactly what he was doing. Build quality is flawless yet again. This time around the power button is also easily accessible, which was the single biggest issue I had with the original Hugo - that power switch was atrocious!

I used the Hugo 2 as my only source on CanJam Europe and it handled every headphone so easily! I don't think I ever passed 50% of the volume and that is including headphones from Audeze, MrSpeakers and the MySphere 3.1. It is amazing that the same source can be so delicate with high-sensitive IEMs.

I'm leaving the discussion about taps and filters to the biologically apparently much better gifted ears on Head-Fi, that can easily tell a night and day difference. All I can say is that the Hugo 2 has no real setbacks whatsoever. It sounds clear, tight, transparent, has low OI, low noise, plenty of power and superb build quality with great design. The battery has never died on me so far. Size is a bit clunky for portable use but the desktop mode probably means this is more suited to people that want a single universally applicable source and who travel a lot. Personally, I am confident I could find a more suitable and especially cheaper portable device. But alas, I don't have to.

 

Wonderful.

 

"Qutest is a standalone DAC whose performance belies its compact dimensions. With DAC architecture based on the award-winning Hugo 2, Qutest offers class-leading digital conversion"

Makes a lot more sense than the Hugo 2, if you desperately need something Chord.

 

Rob Watt is pretty clear on the official Head-Fi Qutest thread that he considers it a product more or less strictly meant for speaker setups (doesn´t seem to believe in connecting a separate headphone amplifier after his DAC designs) and says if you´re using headphones just get a Hugo 2 instead.

Just my 25 cents, but if you trust a manufacturer with an exotic technology approach enough to buy their gear, you might as well trust the lead designer that adding a headphone amplifier to a Qutest would degrade the signal compared to a Hugo 2. From this perspective the only step up from Hugo 2 in the Chord lineup is the DAVE (unfortunately).

Edit: That came across as a bit more confrontational than intended, sorry. Just wanted to emphasize that "officially" at least the Qutest is irrelevant for headphone audio (which I´m inclined to believe, but who knows).

 

Vorlon, with all my respect to you, this is not personal, but I think this Rob Watts recommendation is full of bullshit. Now, without any more dread comments, let go back to the topic.

 

No offense taken, you could well be right (and anyone connecting the Qutest into a traditional headphone amplifier) and me a bit too gullible. There are definitely some inconsistent things such as if galvanic isolation isn´t needed with battery powered gear, why is it in the Hugo TT? It´s likely it would be in the Hugo 2 as well if it didn´t drain the battery that much. I´d prefer if the Hugo 2 wasn´t portable at all, it´s not like a 0.5 kg brick is something you want to carry around that much anyway (and any standard headphone amp/dac is easy to transport from location to location).

Also Rob´s statements that Hugo 2 isn´t compromised by the lack of galvanic isolation are apparently based on his tests with his MSI laptop (battery powered). Which is quite a different case compared to a standard desktop PC...

 

Here´s a small update... I ended up buying the Hugo 2 - got a fantastic trade in deal for the HDV 820. I´m not sure how it works in the US, but here in Finland at least you can get some seriously good deals this way. My guess: dealers aren´t allowed to change the MSRP price, but they can kind of sidestep this by offering in some cases more value for mint condition trade in stuff than you could get if you sell the item on the used market yourself. This is one of the reasons (if not the main one) I have little interest in higher end gear from over here relatively unknown brands like Schiit. Prices are higher too as it´s no longer a direct sale, not to mention the more expensive shipping costs making upgrades considerably more expensive. That being said, I guess that´s just how it is everywhere - buying locally made gear always has certain advantages.

Been using the Hugo 2 for more than a week now so I´ve had more time to get accustomed to it:

- There was some speculation on this thread that there may be issues with USB especially if your source is a noisy mains powered (usually gaming) PC. Although I mentioned previously that Rob Watts has stated that USB should be on the same level as optical/coax at least from battery powered laptops, I can now confirm there definitely are potential issues with standard mains powered PC´s. I´ve got two setups: a passively cooled PC purely for web/music listening and a main heavy duty gaming rig. As I mentioned previously the Mojo I used to own had audible hiss/clicks issues with the latter. The Hugo 2 no longer showed the hiss/clicks, but I was in for quite a surprise when I tried the Hugo 2 on my second PC that has an optical output.

When I wrote my initial impressions I mentioned there was at first a strange fatigue causing effect in the highs, although my brain seemed to get accustomed to it and no longer hear it after several hours. Keep in mind I´m not very treble sensitive though and never had issues with Sabre32 DAC based products for example. Well, now I found out this was definitely an RF issue from noisy USB power. As soon as I switched from USB to optical something changed in the highs. The thing I was complaining about disappeared entirely and the highs become much less highlighted. It wasn´t brightness that disappeared, but more of a certain kind of edge. This wasn´t a small effect, more like something you don´t even need to do careful A/B tests to hear it like you do when comparing 320 kbs AAC vs. FLAC for example.

What does this mean? It´s pretty clear to me that due to how small the Hugo 2 is and its need to be able to run from batteries, more efficient isolation could simply not be made for a product with these design goals. I´m inclined to believe that this may not be an issue with most battery powered laptops, but mains powered heavy duty PC rigs are quite a different beast.

In other words if you are considering getting the Hugo 2 as a desktop DAC for a mains powered PC, be prepared to have to use optical or buy an USB-SPDIF converter (I´d go for an Eitr, from what I´ve read it seems to be the best value right now). Another route would be to get one of those audiophile USB hubs (Wyrd, iFi USB stuff etc.) I am a little bit disappointed by this, but it´s not a big deal for me. Would I prefer the Hugo 2 to be a bit larger/without batteries and fix this? Absolutely, but it is what it is.

- The sound quality has improved noticeably via optical. I still stand by my general sound description (extremely detailed, fast and has an ethereal vibe to it; fantastic resolution, instrument separation and microdynamics, but lacks in macrodynamics), but the fatigue factor is no longer there for me. Might there be a little of it still left? Possibly, but due to all the brain burn in I have no way to know that anymore. In general the sound is now more balanced and also more forgiving as the treble highlighting tendency is no longer there. That being said, the treble is still very revealing (more than on HDV 820) and as a consequence badly recorded albums will sound harsher than on more euphonic gear.

- There´s a nice flow to the sound that I find difficult to characterize. It´s not an organic flow you get from good tube gear, but more like an effortless digital (not using digital as a negative description here) flow. Extremely clean, low noise floor and effortless.

- Its main weakness is still macrodynamics: you just won´t get the same kind of authority/scale/slam you get with huge power supplies. You can find gear with better macrodynamics for half the price. It´s also not euphonic or warm, but I´m inclined to believe it´s quite neutral as different albums sound very different as it should be. It´s not cold or bright either though. That being said, if you are into the typical R2R sound you´ll probably find this a bit too thin sounding for you. It has different strengths though.

- Another weakness is soundstage, but only compared to balanced outputs. I've never heard any single ended gear rival a well implemented balanced drive like on HDV 820 (this is not an exception).

- It never gets confused with complex material. Layering is always sharp and it digs microdetail a lot deeper than many other DACs (no contest vs. HDV 820).

- Nice small footprint on your desk. This is very subjective; I´m mostly done with large separates though. I want small one box solutions that disappear on my desk. This the Hugo 2 delivers in spades. The remote control is also a nice touch and the orb interface is very easy to use after you get over the initial learning curve. Runs much cooler than the Mojo too now that it´s in desktop mode.

- Are Chord prices pretty crazy when you look at likely bill of materials? Yeah they are and it´s pretty obvious they have huge margins. I´m pretty sure most companies in high end audio would do exactly the same if they could though. The fact they can also says a lot about their technology: it´s legit good. They also excel in efficient marketing. That being said, stay away from the hyperbole that Chord gear competes with stuff 3x the price. That´s what they say about almost everything in the high end audio press. If you ask me truth is that there are a lot of good options these days, but most gear competes the best exactly at the price range they are set in (with some exceptions like Eitr, original Mojo for portable use, HD 600 and so on).

- Very versatile as in it will run more demanding headphones (yet without the macrodynamics you´ll get with large mains powered amps; this may be an issue for many, I´m more into an analytical sound anyway as you can tell from my main headphones the HD 800 S) and small IEM gear. In my experience this is quite a rare combination. Almost all desktop amps (especially the ones with good macrodynamics) I´ve tried have sounded bad with IEM gear and this is an exception to that rule. Lately I´ve been listening to the HIFIMAN RE-600 on the Hugo 2, there´s very good synergy with this euphonic IEM (the digital high resolution flow is just what this IEM needs).

Who would I recommend the Hugo 2 to? For people who prefer well implemented delta-sigma over R2R (Burr Brown stuff, some Sabre32 designs), are ready to use some USB decrapifiers/SPDIF if they aren´t running a laptop, prefer compact desktop friendly all in one gear and want the option to use both headphones and IEMs on the same rig. For me it´s also a ticket to venture outside my comfort zone (anything non-Sennheiser) and try out a few new headphones. Due to the IEM synergy I´m expecting it to excel well with the sensitive Focal Clears in particular, but we´ll see...

 

Just like the Original Hugo, the Hugo 2 can't drive most of the full-size headphones properly.
You will need an external Amp anyway. Hence get the Chord Qutest if you are desperate for something Chord.

 

That´s one way of looking at it - I would have to disagree on that. The Hugo 2 runs the HD 800 S very well for my taste. The only thing that´s lacking are the macrodynamics, but in return you get microdynamics and resolution to die for (much better than on HDV 820 for example). I´m inclined to believe both would degrade with an added separate amp. It´s the purity of sound that comes along with the almost direct drive from the DAC. Adding more power/grunt would also very likely make it worse for IEM use / highly sensitive headphones. Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses. It´s just like higher output impedance amps (both OTL tube and transistor designs) pair the best with high ohm dynamics, but in return you are then kind of limited to running mostly those. No solution is perfect for everything at the same time. Besides the general trend is towards making easier to run headphones these days anyway.

+ I don´t have much interest in running separates anymore. In other words the products I´m primarily comparing the Hugo 2 against are a much smaller list (stuff like: Benchmark DAC3, Oppo HA-1, Naim All-in-One stuff, HDV 820 etc.) Against those it competes very well.

Just wanted to provide an alternative view (I´m aware Chord gear isn´t exactly usually highly valued here on SBAF and that´s fine, I enjoy the critical discussions even if they don´t gloss over the gear choices I go for)

 

Thanks for your impressions! Have you had a change to compare it againts the original Hugo? I owned one a while back and whilst I did enjoy some aspects of the sound, I found the treble to be a bit unclean. If this has improved substantially, I might have to give Hugo 2 a change...

 

Thanks for your clear review Vorlon...

My experience is any piece of gear whatever the price is less important than the cleaning of the electrical grid where the Audio system is embedded..... For me there exist 3 problems: the treatment of all links separately againt vibrations, the synergetic complementary of all links,last but not least the cleaning of the principal electrical grid of the house.... My Starting point system dac tda 1543 does not sound the same and is not on the same level embedded in a cleaned audio grid, and treated system, or not....

 

To be honest I didn´t like the original Hugo much, I thought it sounded worse than the Mojo with most headphones. Plus it was annoyingly bright sounding with the HD 800 S. The Hugo 2 sounds very different to my ears. Much higher resolution, more clarity and speed. The highs did initially have a certain edge via USB, but it´s no longer there with optical. I´m not very treble sensitive though as I´ve never found the classic Sabre32 glare (I can hear what people are referring to there though) annoying for example.

Do you live in the capital area? If yes, just ask MarekSound* for a weekend loaner. I´d never buy anything this expensive in audio without an extended loaner first. You´d probably get the same unit I just had over here. Plus they have a good headphone demo station connected to Tidal next to everything from Oppo gear to the Chord Dave if you want to listen to it for half an hour or so before deciding if you want to loan it out. Just don't listen to the Dave unless you want all the other gear they have (including the Hugo 2) to sound notably inferior. Also feel free to PM me if you want to discuss the Hugo 2 differences more.

* I have nothing to do with them, just a long time customer and I think they´re the only place right now that sells Chord in Finland.

 

I am not based in the capital area, so only option would be to make a short listening visit, or maybe stay at a hotel for a weekend. Meh, too much hassle. Maybe if I spot a second hand unit I give it a try.