Chord Hugo 2

I've also heard the LCD-3 which were pretty coloured/dark. My XCs are Nov 2016. They are a bit V shaped (although much less than TH-900) but have good detail/resolution and overall excellent IMO. No problem hearing differences or deficiencies in DACs here.

Spoiler: From Audeze support

Your headphones serial number 8521476 were manufactured on 09/28/16.
Here is a list of all of the changes that our 2016 revisions brought to the table:

• Reduced diaphragm thickness: Reduces driving mass for greater diaphragm response.
• Higher compliance: Lowers resonance for improved low frequency extension and bass definition.
• Optimized magnetic circuit: Creates more uniform magnetic flux distribution for a more uniform driving force, smooths frequency response, lowers distortion, with greater resolution and improved imaging.
• Improved diaphragm tensioning: A new system delivers better performance and improved consistency for less variation between units.
• Improved internal damping: Better, more controlled bass and a smoother overall frequency response.
• New voicing: Smooths the midrange response.

 

You don't need a particularly good headphone to tell just how poor the Hugo 2 is. What you would need a properly good transducer for is to split hairs between good DACs. That said, the XC is a f**k awful headphone, the MA900 is a more credible review headphone than it.

 

I honestly think they took the Mojo architecture and just added more taps, beefed up the amp and called it a day. That's what it sounded like to me, just a slightly better mojo with slightly better highs (though kinda off like others are reporting) and less muddiness for $1500 more.

 

Did you see the new chord hugo review? What do you think about it?

There isn’t another DAC around at anywhere near this sort of price able to communicate so torrentially, so unambiguously or so effortlessly. We like it a lot.



Put simply, it is difficult in the extreme to find meaningful fault with the way Hugo 2 converts and delivers your digital audio files.

And while it’s obviously preferable to feed in a file of meaningful size in order to hear Hugo 2 at its best, unlike the outgoing Hugo this DAC doesn’t have a lot of unkind observations to make if you lower yourself to Bluetoothing a 320kbps Spotify file. Hugo 2 simply makes the best of it.

Broadly speaking, there’s no change in Hugo 2’s character whether its handling a Spotify-derived stream of Big Boi’s All Night or a Qobuz Sublime+ 24bit/96kHz file of Michael Jackson’s Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough.

The bigger the file and the more information Hugo 2 has to play with, the greater the detail and fidelity of its performance - naturally - but in all circumstances Hugo 2 serves up a detailed, dynamic and punchy performance.

Timing is perhaps Hugo 2’s strongest suit of all – it brings absolutely believable unity to ensemble music. That Michael Jackson tune features both brass and strings sections in addition to the more standard bass/guitar/keyboard/drums rock’n’roll line-up, but there’s never any suggestion the musicians aren’t interacting in the most natural way.

There’s crispness and clarity to Hugo 2’s sound, admirable management of tempos and an unequivocal layout to the soundstage.


Read more at https://www.whathifi.com/chord/hugo-2/review#mWjFzkR2TR19fEob.99

 

Must be true, because WhatHIFI are saying this. You won't find a negative review of a Chord product -- Ever!

 

... and who sponsors the ads on What HiFi? I don't think they ever gave any Chord product less than 5 stars.

Head Fi has the same problem, except with shill reviews thrown into the mix, at least What HiFi's bias is obvious enough.

On the other hand SBAF is funded by 20 bucks here and there from folks like you or me, not by manufacturers or dealers.

 

Whathifi didn't find anything less than perfect on the Hugo1, so what did the Hugo2 improve upon ?

 

>British

 

WhatHifi is Chord and Main little pet.

 

For anyone interested (not that it will be a large audience here) the Hugo v1 is available on MassDrop again.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/chord-hugo-dac-amp

For the low-low price of $1,399 versus an "MSRP" of $2,195 (never mind that Audio Advisor sells it for $1,495).

Let the arguments over whether MD has authority to sell this and what it means for any warranty commence!

 

Yes, never believe the MSRP that MD advertises. Do your own quick search online for typical prices.

 

They're not technically wrong, just practically useless.

 

I don't know if it's heresy or not, but faced with a choice between a used Yggdrasil and a new Gungnir Multibit as similar prices, I chose the Gungnir Multibit for the fact that it sounds marginally less analytical and more relaxed- if that makes sense. Even throwing away that last bit of accuracy, the Gungnir Multibit sounds mighty detailed, and that VXO-ed input means you don't loose the edge of hard transients due to phase noise smearing.

(..plus a new unit=warranty and indirectly feeding the money pipe back to Schiit, who I am growing increasing fond of. They make some good honest stuff.)

@bengo - interesting remarks about the Hugo 2, thanks. The thing with the treble being grating sounds a bit like the treble pricklyness that you get with the Mojo. Have you heard both, and if so, can you comment?

(Also, every time you write "PRaT", I want to slap the life out of you. That's pure HF/audiophool vocab, I can't help the conditioned reflex, sorry.)

I am British, and faintly embarrassed by the way my country is behaving of late, too. However, long before that, I was also embarrassed by the antics of Chord, so will take a pass here.

Sold my Mojo, bought a WM1A for mobile use, and one of Mr. Moffat's finest Gumbies for desktop use. I don't think the queen is going to come and kick my ass for that. I don't think she'd have any tolerance for John Franks and his shit, either.

 

@Kattefjaes These are the only Chord units I have heard.

The treble isn't that obviously prickly, but there is a subconscious feeling that something ain't right.

I slapped myself, twice, since you are unable to do so in person, although I feel the more British thing to do would be to apologise profusely. Terribly sorry old chap. I also edited to remove the offensive acronym. Maybe SBAF needs censorship after all

 

@bengo - Interesting, thanks terribly for the response, old bean

 

For those keeping scores, here's some of Rob Watt's fluff on Hugo 2 as part of the HF tour:

The design still uses the Watts Transient Filter. And Rob seems to be honest; or not, but I'm confounded on what it is that was meant.

 

Put through the real talk filter:

 

I've been reading chord posts some several months since hugo1 debut. At first I thought chord forum posts were sincere and thoughtfulll. But nowadays, my impression are quite different. They put you in a lot of mumble jumbo, always in a polite and unique explanation about their exquisite tech. Well, I'm a psychiatrist with a forensic degree, and my humble analysis of this attitude is not good, if you know what I mean... peace.