Please see the description field for the equipment list including headphones used. NOTE: one of the areas where I could readily notice a slightly thinner tonality with the Hugo2 was in vocals, which sounded a bit less full bodied/lush than with the Hugo TT and even Mojo. That said, the Hugo 2 does have an ever so slightly wider soundstage overall which was noticeable although not dramatically so. It’s like the sweetness with the Hugo 2 lpis more towards the highs, whereas is the sweetness with the others is more towards the mid range.
Would you recommend the Mojo 2s or Hugo 2 for computer/phone audio? Lucked out on some MDR-Z1Rs on the cheaper end. Hugo 2 is a little outside my budget, but I noticed you say you prefer the sound on the Mojo somewhat.
Nice review. I got H2 and I considered TT. The reason I got H2 was it comes with the latest Watt tech, but also portability. For you, it would not make sense to get H2 as you have TT and Mojo. H2 was on a bright side when I got it new, but after using it for 100 hrs or so, the brightness has settled down and it now just sounds neutral all day long. With some music, the first filter (white) can sound little bright on a transparent system, but the 2nd filter (HF roll off) will take care of the brightness without losing details. I use H2 with NightHawks for a portable setup and I don't hear much of sound difference by changing the filters or X-PHD because I think the hawks are not that sensitive or transparent headphones (but that's why I got them). But my speaker setup which consists of very neutral / transparent devices, I can hear change in every filter setting and the 2nd filter setting sounds the best to my ears with my setup. H2 is very transparent and revealing device that has really accurate tonality! All I can say is that your recommendation is spot on- For those audiophiles / music lovers who need a high quality DAC / preamp for stereo setup or headphones, must audition H2.
I enjoy the Hugo 2 vastly more than Mojo. They have different signatures - Mojo is mid lush, Hugo 2 has stronger bass and treble. Overall Hugo 2 resolves more yet is cleaner. It also has bigger soundstage, more separation, imaging etc. I was debating Hugo 2 vs Yggdrasil but considering the size, portability, headphone amp presence and price (in my country India, Yggdrasil cost $1250 more than Hugo 2) I went for Chord.
+funkrafty Some will prefer the more U-shaped signature of the Hugo2 for sure. I prefer the more lush signature of the other Chord DACs mentioned, which are still super resolving but more involving, more analog-like listen.
I have mojo and hugo 2 and the hugo 2 is far better in all aspects to my ears. I don't hear any 'U' shape or have any fatigue. I haven't had chance to hear the TT so can't comment.
Yggdrasil is $2300. For $1300 you can get the Gungnir Multibit and you'd be hard pressed to hear any difference. At $2200 The Gungnir/Mjolnir 2 combo is really hard to beat at 2-4x this price point, especially when paired with Focal Utopia. FWIW I auditioned this Schiit combo in home for 2 weeks against the Hugo TT before settling on the cheaper option. And it wasn't because I couldn't afford the HugoTT ;)
I haven't seen all of your videos, so I don't know if you already do this, but I often see comparison videos doing very well on youtube. I think due to your extensive knowledge about audio and keen ear, you could make some really good videos comparing DACs, cans, amps, etc.
Hi Tristan, excellent update. May please ask did you try listening with the crossfade off? I understand this can sometimes be accidentally turned on. It is the X-PHD button. It might reduce sound stage.
Have you tried hugo 2 with coax with a good dap as a source. I hear the sound is warmer, smoother and more pleasent unlike the bright slightly harsh sound u get from usb.
Anyone know how I can get the thing to work on android usb? I got it working with Win10 usb but the only way I can connect either Samsung galaxy tab2 or galaxy s7 to connect it Bluetooth??
The Hugo2 will bust your budget since it's over $2,000! That said the DAC is way better in the Hugo2 as are the details. I'd go for the Chord unless you know you want a transportable tube amp. and prefer the Woo house sound.
Could you give some insight compared to hugo 1? I think some people own a hugo, and ask themselves to switch or not to hugo 2. Hugo TT is another price range league... I read hugo 1 is somehow warmer and better with vocals still... will you do a video review comparing both?
phototristan it's sound almost the same as the Hugo TT. The Hugo TT has a tad less distortion compared to the original Hugo, has XLR output and USB galvanic isolation.
That's true to an extent however as I state in this video, if I could only have one Chord device, it would be the Hugo 2. Stay tuned because I will soon be reviewing the Hugo 2 with the 2Go unit.
I'd summarize it as luxury electronics. Like any other luxury item. That's all (purse, watch, car, etc etc.) You paying for brand name, design, fancy materials. Eventually this aproach would result in a better product, such quality, overall performance and so on Until certain threshold, though. Beyond that it is only marketing strategy to charge more money. In speakers world is even more evident
There is a difference in sound with chord products. If you can hear the difference buy a cheap $100 dac and be happy and done. In speakers and headphones there is a difference as you move up in price. There are good speakers available around $1,500 usd. As you move up the price range there are diminishing returns though.
Single ended is actually better in most cases. This is from Rob Watts: “Why do you believe SE is better than balanced for a DAC? Well this is a complex subject, and sometimes a balanced connection does sound better than single ended (SE) - in a pre-power context - but it depends upon the environment, and the pre and power and the interconnect. But the downside of balanced is that you are doubling the number of analogue components in the direct signal path, and this degrades transparency. In my experience every passive component is audible, every metal to metal interface (including solder joints - I once had a lot of fun listening to solder) has an impact - in case of metal/metal interfaces it degrades detail resolution and the perception of depth. So going balanced will have a cost in transparency. In DAC design, going balanced is essential with silicon design; there is simply too much substrate noise and other effects not too. But with discrete DAC's you do not need to worry about this, so going SE on a discrete DAC is possible, and is how all my DAC's are done. But differential operation hides certain problems (notably reference circuit) that has serious SQ effects; so going SE means those problems are exposed, which forces one to solve the issue fundamentally. In short, to make SE work you have to solve many more problems, but the result of solving those problems solves SQ issues than differential operation hides when you do measurements. In the case of Dave, I have gotten state of the art measured performance - distortion harmonics below -150 dB, zero measurable noise floor modulation - and there is no way you could do this with a differential architecture. So it is possible to have better measured performance with SE than differential, but it is a lot harder to do it - indeed, the only way of getting virtually zero distortion and noise floor modulation is SE. “ From www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-94
Certainly understandable. You are however also largely paying for the Rob Watt's proprietary FPGA DAC technology (which is unique) so it's not only the cost of the hardware.
Hi Brian, though I'm not quite versed on the tech I did find this interview with the designer online: www.the-ear.net/how-to/rob-watts-chord-mojo-tech. The same tech is reportedly found on all their DACs which includes the $500 Mojo. BTW, it's not unusual to find custom built high end dedicated DACs to cost around $2,000 where I've seen in many case prices exceed $10,000. If you don't own a set of $2,000 headphones or $10,000 speakers you can definitely disregard these products. There's better bang for the buck products out there that are much less similar to Schiit Audio products, Audio-gd, etc., especially if your listening gear is more modest.
Please see the description field for the equipment list including headphones used. NOTE: one of the areas where I could readily notice a slightly thinner tonality with the Hugo2 was in vocals, which sounded a bit less full bodied/lush than with the Hugo TT and even Mojo. That said, the Hugo 2 does have an ever so slightly wider soundstage overall which was noticeable although not dramatically so. It’s like the sweetness with the Hugo 2 lpis more towards the highs, whereas is the sweetness with the others is more towards the mid range.
Would you recommend the Mojo 2s or Hugo 2 for computer/phone audio? Lucked out on some MDR-Z1Rs on the cheaper end. Hugo 2 is a little outside my budget, but I noticed you say you prefer the sound on the Mojo somewhat.
Nice review. I got H2 and I considered TT. The reason I got H2 was it comes with the latest Watt tech, but also portability. For you, it would not make sense to get H2 as you have TT and Mojo. H2 was on a bright side when I got it new, but after using it for 100 hrs or so, the brightness has settled down and it now just sounds neutral all day long. With some music, the first filter (white) can sound little bright on a transparent system, but the 2nd filter (HF roll off) will take care of the brightness without losing details. I use H2 with NightHawks for a portable setup and I don't hear much of sound difference by changing the filters or X-PHD because I think the hawks are not that sensitive or transparent headphones (but that's why I got them). But my speaker setup which consists of very neutral / transparent devices, I can hear change in every filter setting and the 2nd filter setting sounds the best to my ears with my setup. H2 is very transparent and revealing device that has really accurate tonality! All I can say is that your recommendation is spot on- For those audiophiles / music lovers who need a high quality DAC / preamp for stereo setup or headphones, must audition H2.
I want to compare this to my $2300 Sony ES amp/dac.
I enjoy the Hugo 2 vastly more than Mojo. They have different signatures - Mojo is mid lush, Hugo 2 has stronger bass and treble. Overall Hugo 2 resolves more yet is cleaner. It also has bigger soundstage, more separation, imaging etc.
I was debating Hugo 2 vs Yggdrasil but considering the size, portability, headphone amp presence and price (in my country India, Yggdrasil cost $1250 more than Hugo 2) I went for Chord.
+funkrafty Some will prefer the more U-shaped signature of the Hugo2 for sure. I prefer the more lush signature of the other Chord DACs mentioned, which are still super resolving but more involving, more analog-like listen.
I have mojo and hugo 2 and the hugo 2 is far better in all aspects to my ears. I don't hear any 'U' shape or have any fatigue. I haven't had chance to hear the TT so can't comment.
+ohmniac Yeah, none of the Chord DACs are fatiguing.
Yggdrasil is $2300. For $1300 you can get the Gungnir Multibit and you'd be hard pressed to hear any difference. At $2200 The Gungnir/Mjolnir 2 combo is really hard to beat at 2-4x this price point, especially when paired with Focal Utopia. FWIW I auditioned this Schiit combo in home for 2 weeks against the Hugo TT before settling on the cheaper option. And it wasn't because I couldn't afford the HugoTT ;)
Wesley Pruett not a patch on Chord DACs timing mate.
I haven't seen all of your videos, so I don't know if you already do this, but I often see comparison videos doing very well on youtube. I think due to your extensive knowledge about audio and keen ear, you could make some really good videos comparing DACs, cans, amps, etc.
I do that often.
Hi Tristan, excellent update. May please ask did you try listening with the crossfade off? I understand this can sometimes be accidentally turned on. It is the X-PHD button. It might reduce sound stage.
Have you tried hugo 2 with coax with a good dap as a source. I hear the sound is warmer, smoother and more pleasent unlike the bright slightly harsh sound u get from usb.
hey guys ! when I use BT there is always a sounds issue ( distortion ) and when I use USB the problem goes away , is this a common issue ?
Anyone know how I can get the thing to work on android usb? I got it working with Win10 usb but the only way I can connect either Samsung galaxy tab2 or galaxy s7 to connect it Bluetooth??
Did you have a chance to compare Hugo 2 and TT to the Qutest?
I haven’t but I understand the Qutest sounds about the same as the Hugo 2
@@phototristan ok thanks! So you don't think the Qutest equals the TT and the new TT2?
Frank Wong No, it equals the Hugo 2. TT2 has 2x the digital taps as the Hugo 2 and way more power as well.
@@phototristan and TT2 sounds warmer than Hugo 2 and Qutest I guess?
@@klepp19 Generally, yes.
Chord Hugo 2 or Wa8, looking for 1 1000-2000$ transportable dac/amp.
The Hugo2 will bust your budget since it's over $2,000! That said the DAC is way better in the Hugo2 as are the details. I'd go for the Chord unless you know you want a transportable tube amp. and prefer the Woo house sound.
Woo Audio sounded just outright retro, too tubey for my taste, it's not 80s anymore.
WA8 is awesome. If you want a tube sound and listen to music with vocals being the main focus. The Hugo2 sounds thin, better for EDM.
Could you give some insight compared to hugo 1? I think some people own a hugo, and ask themselves to switch or not to hugo 2. Hugo TT is another price range league... I read hugo 1 is somehow warmer and better with vocals still... will you do a video review comparing both?
juls youtube I haven’t heard Hugo 1 so can’t really say.
phototristan it's sound almost the same as the Hugo TT. The Hugo TT has a tad less distortion compared to the original Hugo, has XLR output and USB galvanic isolation.
Audiophilia is an ever expensive hobby.
Indeed.
This is the only time I've seen somebody prefer the Mojo to the Hugo 2
That's true to an extent however as I state in this video, if I could only have one Chord device, it would be the Hugo 2. Stay tuned because I will soon be reviewing the Hugo 2 with the 2Go unit.
The TT is thousands more...not sure why it's being contrasted with Hugo 2 in regards to sound. Ofc it's better 😅
Hi it's not minor there's a gap ! at u.s $2000 someone should be in jail !
Luckily it was just the review unit I received. I've seen several others since, and none of them had that gap.
Alien technology 😄👍
I'd summarize it as luxury electronics. Like any other luxury item. That's all (purse, watch, car, etc etc.)
You paying for brand name, design, fancy materials. Eventually this aproach would result in a better product, such quality, overall performance and so on
Until certain threshold, though. Beyond that it is only marketing strategy to charge more money. In speakers world is even more evident
There is a difference in sound with chord products. If you can hear the difference buy a cheap $100 dac and be happy and done. In speakers and headphones there is a difference as you move up in price. There are good speakers available around $1,500 usd. As you move up the price range there are diminishing returns though.
Anyone finds Chord products unattractive? They are all class leading performers but the designs and finishes lack details and luxury. Just my opinion.
That's subjective. I like their designs quite a bit with the exception of the Hugo 2 which seems to have sharper edges than their other products.
It may be one of the best equipment but has highly unergonomic and poor built.
For this much money the build quality is crap! ..... Wow! Can't see buying this dac. They need to do a lot better.
Have you listened to the hugo2? I5 sounds pretty damn good. I just picked up a TT2 and the build quality is really good.
At this price and no Balance headphones out? What on earth they have been? In hell to say the best!
Single ended is actually better in most cases. This is from Rob Watts:
“Why do you believe SE is better than balanced for a DAC?
Well this is a complex subject, and sometimes a balanced connection does sound better than single ended (SE) - in a pre-power context - but it depends upon the environment, and the pre and power and the interconnect. But the downside of balanced is that you are doubling the number of analogue components in the direct signal path, and this degrades transparency. In my experience every passive component is audible, every metal to metal interface (including solder joints - I once had a lot of fun listening to solder) has an impact - in case of metal/metal interfaces it degrades detail resolution and the perception of depth. So going balanced will have a cost in transparency.
In DAC design, going balanced is essential with silicon design; there is simply too much substrate noise and other effects not too. But with discrete DAC's you do not need to worry about this, so going SE on a discrete DAC is possible, and is how all my DAC's are done. But differential operation hides certain problems (notably reference circuit) that has serious SQ effects; so going SE means those problems are exposed, which forces one to solve the issue fundamentally. In short, to make SE work you have to solve many more problems, but the result of solving those problems solves SQ issues than differential operation hides when you do measurements.
In the case of Dave, I have gotten state of the art measured performance - distortion harmonics below -150 dB, zero measurable noise floor modulation - and there is no way you could do this with a differential architecture. So it is possible to have better measured performance with SE than differential, but it is a lot harder to do it - indeed, the only way of getting virtually zero distortion and noise floor modulation is SE. “
From www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-94
really don't like the design , ugly in my eyes,
Sorry but this thing CAN'T cost THAT much to make... $2000? No thanks I will pass
Certainly understandable. You are however also largely paying for the Rob Watt's proprietary FPGA DAC technology (which is unique) so it's not only the cost of the hardware.
So its a FPGA board running code that makes it a DAC?
Hi Brian, though I'm not quite versed on the tech I did find this interview with the designer online: www.the-ear.net/how-to/rob-watts-chord-mojo-tech. The same tech is reportedly found on all their DACs which includes the $500 Mojo. BTW, it's not unusual to find custom built high end dedicated DACs to cost around $2,000 where I've seen in many case prices exceed $10,000. If you don't own a set of $2,000 headphones or $10,000 speakers you can definitely disregard these products. There's better bang for the buck products out there that are much less similar to Schiit Audio products, Audio-gd, etc., especially if your listening gear is more modest.
phototristan you also forgot to mention the aircraft grade aluminium, manufactured in one of the best metal factories in the world in the U.K.
I'm getting the Audeze LCD 4 and chord mojo. I don't have the dough to spend 2k on a dac/amp.
i cannot understand how u can ask this price for such a poor build quality...
It was just the review unit. I have not heard of the issue since.
tfw the focus is off...