Chord Electronics Hugo 2

Soundstage, D/A, Amplification, Space/Time, and Why I Won’t Be Buying the Hugo2


Background: My Subjective Perspective

This is my Hugo2 Tour review. We’ve been rightly cautioned against making our Hugo2 review about other gear, but at the same time I know we’d all agree that it’s important to give context. If we say the Hugo sounds transparent or lush it’s helpful to have points of reference. Also, writing more broadly gives the reader some insight into the psychology of the reviewer so the reader can evaluate their evaluation. I open this way because I feel I may get into a little bit of trouble with this review. So….

I’m not someone who gets excited over new gear and then starts to cool on it as the novelty wears off. Case in point, two new pieces of gear recently came into my system: the Audeze LCD-i4 and the Hugo2. I’ve gotten to know the Audeze pretty thoroughly by now as it’s reacquainted me with large sectors of my music library. I loved it from day one and I still think: the wheel, sliced bread, the i4. I used the i4 exclusively for this review as it is the most talented, revealing transducer I currently own, especially with the Uber Too cable. However, my path with the Hugo2 has not been so linear (foreshadowing).

When I first plugged In the Hugo2 my immediate thought was “Oh no. I’m in trouble.” I think many of you know what I mean. I knew I was in trouble because somewhere in my head I clutched the Hugo2 and took off running. Running from what, you ask? Also in my head are voices of sanity that routinely plague my thoughts, voices that say horrible, nasty things like: “You don’t really need this.” You already have great gear.” “You just bought the LCD-i4.” “You can’t buy every new thing?” Even as I listened to the Hugo2 I was desperately trying to get my hands on a unit of my own and drafting a letter of complaint to Chord. “Why can’t you all just produce a bad piece for once? Can’t you guys just be cool like that and let us have money for other things?” However, after comprehensive testing, I regrettably won’t be buying one.


The Hugo2 Is More than a Pretty Face

Don’t get me wrong the Hugo2 is spectacular. If all I did was listen to it and review it In isolation I would just gush effusively. It is capable of inflicting upon you an audio amnesia that temporarily makes you forget that other gear exists. First of all, the casing design and machining is gorgeous. If the Hugo1 was mocked by some for its Fisher Price “My First DAC” aesthetics, the Hugo2 suffers no such ridicule. It remains true to Chord’s unmistakable design language and conveys it with premium quality and covetable appeal (my unit had no bad gap tolerances). The Hugo1 did engender some resentment for making you learn its operation instead of conforming to your sense of familiarity. The Hugo2 is likewise controlled by unmarked marbles that you navigate by remembering ROYGBIV from 4th grade. So when I volume match I have to remember 63.4 on my other DAC is blue-indigo on the Hugo2. You forgive this conceit because, well, it’s just so darn beautiful. (Of course you chastise yourself for being shallow and remind yourself that good looks aren’t what’s essential. But, the Hugo2 is “really really good looking.”)

How sad would it be if it were just pretty face with nothing inside? The Hugo2 sounds better than it looks. How good is that? A good point of reference would be to put it up against the already impressive Hugo1. This is a simple comparison to make. The Hugo2 is very much like the Hugo1 except better in every way. It carries the same house sound and philosophy (more on that later), but improves tonality, transparency, dynamics, and especially soundstage. When the first Hugo was released you could readily identify it by its effortlessly natural and flowing presentation. The Hugo2 improves on these characteristics and betters it by throwing a larger more incisive image. If you only compared the Hugo1 and Hugo2 you would think the latter just sounds spacious and vast.


Soundstage, D/A, and Amplification

I have to offer here that personally I’m a soundstage addict. Soundstage gets weighted for me disproportionally over against aspects others seem to care more about. I describe myself as an addict because I don’t understand headfiers that say that certain gear like the HD800s sounds too large. Again, compared to what reference? If you were there at the studio or venue the singer would not sound as if he/she were in between your eyes or the bass as localized somewhere between your throat and upper chest. For me, when I listen to music I want to close my eyes and be “taken there” immersed in sound in front of the stage. So, I’m a soundstage addict. I can’t get enough. Too much is never enough. The Hugo 2 is not enough. I doubt many will share this assessment and so I’m comfortable sharing this as a “minority report.”

So to back up, going from Hugo1 to Hugo2 I thought: “vast,” and would’ve continued thinking this if I did not move to the Simaudio Moon Neo 430HAD. When I did I immediately thought, “Oh, not vast. I forgot. This (the 430HAD) is vast.” I should add that I’m running the Moon balanced with a Synergistic Research USB cable and an Audiophilleo USB to S/pdif convertor. The Audiophilleo does the DAC in the 430HAD quite a few favors one of them being expanding soundstage. Contrary to expectations, the Hugo2 was also not immune to its charms, and the Audiophilleo aided both units with its re-clocking and galvanic isolation. (6moons has a great article on why re-clocking convertors help reportedly jitter-free devices http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/audiophilleo/1.html.) Even so, the 430HAD presented a more open soundstage with greater air and separation between instruments/voices. I went back and forth again and again, checking and re-checking levels, and this was verified for me over days across various genres and instrumental/vocal arrangements and recording venues. The Hugo2 made the throughly capable Hugo1 sound a bit claustrophobic and now the 430HAD made the Hugo2 actually sound compressed. The dimensional layers did not unfold dynamically and find distinct architectural placement as with the Moon Neo.

Now, the first thing that should jump to mind is the fact that that 430HAD is twice the price of the Hugo2. This is not exactly a fair shootout, but it is informative. Firstly, because it’s not just a matter of comparative costs and components but distinctive design philosophies. Chord has repeatedly stated that the Hugo, 1 or 2, functions best when used without additional amplification. The gain stage is not a separate discrete module that can be bypassed but is integral by intent. Without understanding the technicalities involved I have to respect this approach as the results speak for themselves. At the same time this limits the ability to use the Hugo2 as a DAC and compels it to be compared with other high caliber DAC/amp combos. Among portables I can’t help but think it rules the roost, but I can’t agree with those that claim it can replace full home units.

In terms of D/A conversion, I think the Hugo2 performs about as well as anything short of the topmost tier of DACs, and far away better than the prosaic D/A of the 430HAD. However, at least to my ears, it cannot equal the dynamics and soundstage brought into play by a great fully differential desktop amplifier like the 430HAD. Compared to the Moon, the Chord is also missing some high end sparkle in the brilliance/air frequencies but it’s not just a matter of tonality. The well delineated sonic layers of the Hugo2 pump and breath in a more condensed, coalesced way whereas the individual elements rendered by the 430HAD are able to move independently and expand freely. Moreover, there is a transparent clarity to the Moon Neo that makes the creamy transparency of the Hugo2 seem ever so slightly cloudy by comparison. The Chord’s sound is more digitally delicate, detailed, and nuanced but the Moon Neo provides an invisibly crystalline amplification. As for imaging, the Hugo2 finds its sonic components by pen light, in comparison, the 430HAD by a pinpoint laser.

Again, I understand this is not an apples to apples comparison, but the Hugo2 is not just a portable all-in-one. It is a superb DAC, which is by turns equally impressive and frustrating to me. Even at half the price the Hugo2 is worth comparing to the Moon Neo 430HAD because this brings its weaknesses into sharp relief and also its strengths. As easily as the Moon outstages the Chord with the benefits of its world class amplification, the Hugo2 obviously outclasses the 430HAD in the digital realm. The 430HAD employs a lovely implementation of an off the shelf delta sigma chip, but its nothing special like the proprietary genius of the FPGA in the Hugo2.

Going from the Moon to the Chord is like going from video that is shot at 24fps to 60fps. It’s not that the 430HAD stutters in deciphering its samples. The sonic images are perfectly smooth and flowing listened to on their own. The Hugo2 however produces images that are beyond perfectly smooth and move with an almost impossible fluidity. Switching back to the ESS chip in the Moon you now find a slight “temporal granularity.” What I mean is that there is a comparative roughness as your mind finds a graininess from missing frames of sound you previously thought were traveling by too fast as to be perceptible. As a result the Hugo2 fleshes out sonic elements in way that makes the 430HAD sound slightly degraded, less substantial, and less detailed by comparison. It sounds as if in any given bar of music the Hugo2 is simply decoding more information and rendering a fuller portrayal because, you know, it is. The thing is the sound of the Chord flows like digital water but it doesn’t have the analog air of the 430HAD. The 430HAD is better at filling the “space,” and the Hugo2 is superior in terms of filing the “time.”


Space + Time = Peanut Butter Sushi and Why I Can’t Get a Hugo2

Well, you might think the answer would be to combine the two and take the signal out of the Hugo2 and amplify it with the 430HAD. You might think that if you’ve never read a Chord thread where many voices including Chord’s own recommend you not do that. I’ve verified this before with the Hugo1 but of course I have to try again. I keep premium silver wire from a top cable builder on hand for just such purposes. It’s the caliber of wire they don’t sell you. O’ sure they’ll sell you the copper and the silver-plated copper, but their OCC pure silver secretly sourced from aliens crash landed in Shangri-La, they understandably keep for themselves. So a while back I resorted to cannibalizing an expensive custom made cable. I reterminate it with top-tier connectors and Mundorf silver solder as I have need to test gear. This is to ensure that the cabling is not where the comparison is falling down.

So I spent a day making.a pristine connection between the Hugo2 and the 430HAD and testing it out. You know two great tastes that go together to make something even better like peanut butter and chocolate. This was like peanut butter and sushi. I happen to like both but not together. Rob Watts and everyone is right; amplifying the Hugo2 works like whatever the opposite of synergy is. I could still parse out the wonderful sound that the two units bring to the equation but you end up losing the great sound of them both. You can bypass the DAC on the Moon but you can’t bypass the amp on the Chord. As mentioned before, there is nothing to bypass. I know some headfiers are using the Hugo2 with an external amplifier, but to my ears I seem to lose vital degrees of transparency on both components. My frustration in this review is that I really wish I could’ve found a place in my system for this unit I really want, but can’t.

I freely admit I don’t understand any of the engineering decisions that make the Hugos a uniquely integrated unit that don’t give themselves to being used as a DAC only. I accept that for my part I cannot seem to successfully pair the Hugo2 with an external amp. I do wish then that Chord would make a Hugo2-TT with all of its prodigious digital talents integrated with a balanced amplifier that had an equal amount of resources expended upon it. I would pay the double price for such a unit. Alternatively, if I needed a hifi portable instead of a grab-and-go portable I would choose the Hugo2 without a second thought. As it stands I’m looking to optimize home gear these days and, so sadly, reluctantly, I’m going to unclench and let go of the Hugo2. What do you know I am able to listen to those horrible voices of reason in my head.

I'm lucky in the that I cannot hear most of the fine detail others seem to be able to hear, so for me a piece of gear has to really add significant value to be in my chain. Also, I will disclaim that I received the Hugo 2 on a free tour.

The unit feels a bit heavy in the hand, which is to be expected for such an expensive piece of gear. I wouldn't want to use it while walking around or anything, but if you needed to take it home after work in a backpack, or take it with you on travel to set up a rig at your destination, that would work.

The LEDs are bright, but there is a dim option. There's a bare LED inside the device that changes color based on the input kind, and that LED can shine right in the eye at certain angles. This is quite bothersome.

The whole colored interface is silly IMHO. I suppose if I had the devices all the time I might get used to it, but there are 34 different ball/color combinations, not including the volume colors. While the colored balls is innovative, it's not good innovation.

There's a remote. I didn't use it. I suppose if you used the Hugo 2 as DAC with amplified speakers, the remote might be useful.

Bluetooth is only for streaming to the DAC. Again, not sure when this would used for people with a $2100 DAC, but maybe with power speakers on travel? But who brings nice powered speakers when traveling.

As for the filters, they do nothing for me. I had a friend with much better ears (he's a musician and sound mixer) and he also could not hear any difference with the filters.

The crossfeed is well implemented, but all the "on" settings for the crossfeed sound the same to me. It should have been an on/off switch.

I suppose the battery is there more for control over power rather than for portability. That's cool as charging it is easy, and it has all sorts of tech to allow it be charged while playing with no ill effects. I understand it can be plugged in all the time, also with no ill effects.

Sound wise, let's start with the Sennheiser IE80 IEMs. I compared the same music, in ALAC format between the Hugo 2 and my iPad, and I could not hear a difference. I played all my audition songs that I know very well. Maybe the IE80s aren't resolving enough. Maybe I am not sensitive enough. Maybe my ears aren't trained well enough. Meh.

My main solid state audio chain is a Mac, USB to a Bimby, RCA to Auralic Taurus Mk II. This is what I compared the Hugo 2 to. I used a Utopia for most of the listening. Some was with the TH900.

Both headphones sounded wonderful out of the Hugo 2, but I felt I squeezed a tad more detail from the Bimby/Taurus, while the Hugo may have a slightly larger sound stage and was a little less punchy or fatiguing. Differences were small--tiny, which is a testament to the Hugo 2 as the other two "full sized" items retail for about the same price.

Just as a DAC, with the Hugo 2 feeding the Auralic Taurus II, comparing to the Bimby; very hard to tell for me, but the Bimby seems a tad smoother than the Hugo 2. The reverse might be that the Hugo 2 has a bit more extension into the upper range. Not harsh at all, and possibly a bit more detailed, but hard for me to tell. The difference becomes more apparent with a piano solo. Since the Taurus is considered a very neutral amp, the shift is perception between the DACs was interesting.

Finally, I compared the Hugo to the Bimby & Mjolnir 2 with some great WE396a tubes. I definitely preferred the Schiit stack, as did my buddy. Obviously, YMMV.

I enjoyed my time with the Hugo 2, but it's not for me. I'm not sure what the market for it is. It's too big to compete with the Mojo as a portable, and priced too high to compete with a desktop stack that can drive harder to drive headphones better. It drove the Utopia very nicely, but I prefer a tube amp. As a DAC, the much less costly Bibmy was just as good, to me, and there are many fantastic DACs available for way less than the Hugo 2. I suppose the market would be people that want a great set up at home and at work (or on travel), and are willing to carry between. Also, anyone with easy to drive headphones that need a very very small rig would benefit.

I also suppose you could have active speakers, or a speakers and an amp, and the Hugo 2 and a source, and you would have a nice system. The remove might be useful there.

I think if you look at the Hugo 2 as a $2100 DAC with some extra features, it makes more sense. It's a $2100 DAC that can drive IEMs and some headphones when needed, is portable, has a remote, and has the ability to switch between four inputs. It's a pre-amp/DAC plus.

Firstly, let me thank Relic and Barra for organizing the Hugo2 tours. It’s been a great opportunity to demo and now – my very first formal – review. I’ve been a huge fan of Chord since receiving my Mojo shortly after launch in October 2015. I didn’t demo it but took a chance based on the head-fi thread and other reviews. I said and continue to think that in all my years of audio, it has been the best investment I have made. This is mostly in “bang for the buck” terms, but also generally speaking, as I haven’t felt the need to upgrade or try many other options, as I have with preamps, amps, speakers and headphones.

In December 2015 I heard Rob Watts speak and demo the Dave (he even signed my Mojo!), and it was a revelation. While the Dave was only played through speakers in a room full of people, a Mozart piano piece was played alternately on Dave and another high-end DAC (forget which). It was amazingly apparent to all how much better the Dave was at resolving the piano and the timing of the notes. Better than Mojo, obviously, even from that brief listening. This is what I am looking for in Hugo2. (I have never heard the original Hugo or any other Chord DAC.)



And so, the focus of my Hugo2 review will be “Do I need to upgrade?” This is the question every Mojo owner is asking themselves. If it helps, I’ve been seriously into audio for over 30 years. I didn’t get seriously into personal audio until about 3 years ago, and quickly went up the learning and equipment curve. Most of my listening is done via Roon (Apple lossless and AIFF or Tidal hifi), Mojo, Cavalli Liquid Carbon and HifiMan HE-6s (highly modified). I find it a most harmonious combination. About half my listening is alternative/indie rock from the 80’s to the present. About 20% is classical and jazz, with the balance a bit of everything else (but not much pop or country).

I’ll skip all the unboxing and how-it-works commentary, as these have been well reported already. Photography is not a strength of mine, but I have some comparison shots so people get a sense of the different dimensions. I will say, the Mojo interface is simple and works well after a brief learning curve, and Hugo2 is similar, but with more functions, a bit more confusing. The remote is a gift in this regard, particularly in a desktop application. I would not see using the Hugo2 in place of a Mojo or similarly sized DAC, given its size, cost, and complexity of operation, particularly the volume, for on-the-go use.



SOUND - Headphones

As mentioned, all listening was done using CD-quality files either streamed or directly connected. Streaming was done primarily through Airport Express and optical or from a Western Digital Wireless Duo to iPhone with USB out. I did all the testing using battery power only on all devices. My initial listening was using the HE-6 headphones (quite inefficient) powered by the Emotiva BasX A-100 speaker amp. Hugo2 has great bass impact, with Mojo sounding slightly muddy in comparison. Up top, Hugo2 sounded “brittle” and not smooth, like Mojo does. This was evident on several tracks from 10,000 Maniacs Unplugged album.

In this first session, I also noticed two additional things that held up throughout the listening time: the timing reproduction is so amazing that you get the sense the Hugo2 is playing more notes than the Mojo on the same tracks. It’s a similar effect to getting Mojo from something non-Chord, but more so. It’s like listening to the 1981 Glenn Gould Goldberg Variations and then switching to the 1955 version, when he is younger, playing faster and more technically, and with more repeats in the arrangement. The other observation was that much of the tonal difference was in the midrange, where both male and female voices were lacking some body and fullness, compared to Mojo. I think this is due to some increased presence in the 250-300 Hz range on Mojo (around middle C on the piano) or decrease in Hugo2 and another increase in Hugo2 in the ~1kHz (maybe as high as 2kHz?) range compared to Mojo. I wish we had more details from Rob Watts on how he “tuned Mojo to be warmer.”

In the treble, the Hugo2 has more detail and air. This contributes to the wider soundstage, which was generally also more focused, than that of Mojo. I think of the difference almost like two different rooms or halls. Hugo2 is a performance in a larger, livelier hall, while Mojo is the same performance in a more intimate venue. Along these lines, several times when Mojo was plugged in, I forgot I was supposed to be listening and just got caught up in the music. (Cliché, but it really surprised me and I wrote it down, because I was supposed to be “working”!)

The bass was also deeper and more detailed, faster and clearer on the Hugo2. This is one area where there was clear superiority with no trade-offs, in my opinion. This was apparent on most tracks, but stood out with I’m So Lonesome I Could Cry and Sweet Jane from the Cowboy Junkies’ Trinity Sessions, as well as Eric Clapton Unplugged.

After this combo, I tried the Hugo2 directly with the HE-6. Amazingly, it drove them to very satisfying levels with really good results. The most transparent I have been able to hear those phones. I think this is a real strength of the H2. While Mojo can drive almost anything, I would say that the Hugo2 actually can drive anything. It would depend on the type of music, and your listening levels, but for reasonable levels of rock, jazz, and classical music, it was a great experience that you cannot get from Mojo. There may be some brain burn-in by this point, or the Emotiva may be to blame, but HE-6 direct from H2 is a good combo.

Other headphone combinations were HE-6 with Cavalli Liquid Carbon and the H2 directly with the AudioQuest NightHawks, the thinksound ON2s, and the FLC 8S iems. With the LC, the smoothness returned to the top end, removing the brittleness I heard with the Emotiva. But, on some tracks, there was still a bit of glare present. This may be the state of modern recording given the loudness wars, but I was trying to use some of the best-recorded tracks. While the detail was there with the H2, the “I got tubes” feeling with the LC just wasn’t as present when being fed by the Hugo2 compared to the Mojo.

Using the thinksound ON2s, I noted clean sound with no mid bloom, but slightly thin sounding piano on Pink Floyd’s San Tropez (from Meddle), which is a great all-around track for testing out gear. Compared to the Mojo, which exhibited some mid-bass bloom but a more natural sounding piano. Overall, the thinksound’s sounded pretty good on the H2, more clear and detailed than with Mojo, and easier to make out the lyrics in tracks. This is despite the tendency for people to think of these as slightly bright headphones, so go figure.

The AQ NightHawks (I’ve changed the pads to the HM5 sheepskin) are generally full, clean, slightly rolled sounding with the Mojo. With the Hugo2, they sounded faster, with a similar sweet presentation, but with vocals still not quite as full as Mojo. The X-PHD ‘1’ setting (red) seemed to improve this presentation. (More on X-PHD later.) In fact the AQ was the headphone where overall the Hugo2 was preferred to the Mojo.

The FLC 8S (used with red bass filter, grey mid filter, and gunmetal nozzle) were more of a toss-up between Hugo2 and Mojo. In several cases, Mojo could have more balanced and smooth sound, but H2 could also be sweet with more detail and better vocals, if a bit less dynamic sounding. Certainly the Hugo2 was more resolving than the Mojo, even in the bass, but maybe not quite as impactful.



SOUND – Speakers

I got into personal audio because my family – shockingly – didn’t appreciate me hushing them while I blasted speakers throughout the house for hours on end. Now that we’re empty nesters, my wife still doesn’t appreciate it, but I get more opportunities. I generally run the Mojo directly into an Odyssey Stratos Stereo Extreme amplifier feeding Volent Paragon VL-2s. That amp is known as a neutral, powerful SS piece, and the VL-2s (stand-mounted 2-ways with ribbon tweeters) are known for their deep, fast, detailed bass and clean, detailed top end.

The presentation on speakers was similar to the HE-6 presentation with the Emotiva, except lacking much of the noted harshness and brittleness. Where Mojo painted a full sound with intimate soundstage, Hugo2 was larger and more detailed, but a bit leaner. H2 also had more air and treble presence, which seemed slightly lacking on Mojo. For example, on Sweet Jane, through the Mojo you get the wonderful Fender tube amp sound. Through H2, you get more apparent detail but slightly less “warm tubey.” Again, H2 is a bigger room, more detail, but less intimate and less body than Mojo. But in contrast to my primary headphones, it’s a presentation I could live with, trading off the body for the extra detail and air.



FILTERS and CROSSFEED

Others have commented that the filters are not that noticeable. In contrast, I thought they made a big difference (except green), so especially orange and red, the “Mojo” filter. But, while it makes a difference, I did not find that it was anything like the Mojo. It did not restore the body and the balance (increase the lower midrange/decrease the upper midrange, as mentioned above), but rather muddied up the sound and rolled it off, without achieving the same tonality as Mojo. I was not a fan of any filter setting and would not use them.

I tried the X-PHD as much as I could and, as noted above, I did find the lowest setting improved the AudioQuest NightHawks generally. But more often, in other setups, I found that any level of X-PHD sounded harsh or added glare. Just weird to me, with more bass but also added distortion. I may need more time experimenting with different tracks and different levels, but as of this point, I am not a fan.

CONCLUSION

I have no idea if my recollection of the Dave was accurate, or what it sounds like. But, I was looking for Hugo2 to provide me with that kind of experience, virtually making me upgrade my Mojo (you know how it is!). While the H2 has some technically better qualities than the Mojo (soundstage, detail resolution, power), its overall presentation is not as much to my liking, with my music and equipment, as the Mojo. I will definitely try to audition the Dave in home (at some time when spending that amount on equipment is in the realm of reasonable), or the Hugo2 TT. I could even live with the H2 in my home system, but on balance, I think it would only be a slight improvement, and not in all areas.

Video Reviews, first part is Build second is sound quality. Sound Quality review is time stamped according to what I'm listening to/comparing to. Feel free to jump to what ever impressions your interested in.






Being able to integrate with existing solutions has become an important feature for me lately. Plug and play function with my LG V20 and laptop is a large part of why I purchased my Geek Out v2+. That same functionality is a large part of why I enjoyed the Cayin N3 as well. Keeping up with that theme is Chord's Hugo 2. Launched in the Spring of 2017, the transportable Hugo 2 offers an excellent mix of power and quality that is plug and play ready for mobile lifestyles!

Including the remote, the Chord Hugo 2 retails for $2,379. Purchases can be made via a local dealer in your area searchable via the Chord Website. However an little online digging and I found Audio46 as the only Amazon-Payment capable vendor in my area.
Furthermore, I want to thank both Chord and the members of Head-Fi who helped put this tour together, the following thoughts are my own and I was not compensated for them!



What I like about the Hugo 2 build is the weight. It's heavier than it looks which makes me grip it a little tighter when I pick it up. For portable products I like something that has a solid in the hand feel. Super light, super thin, "air" products have never meshed well with me. I always feel like I'm going to lose or crush them. That sense of weight translates over into the implementation of the analog out puts. Each output had distinct grip on my cables with minimal wiggle and just the right amount of resistance when unplugging the cables. As I carried the Hugo 2 around my home during my listening impressions, the cables stayed put.

Chord's unique ball bearing buttons and roller-ball volume adjustment were memorable. While I was not a fan of how much play the individual ball buttons had, I did enjoyed the ease of motion from the volume ball. Unlike the ball bearing buttons, which rattle around when you interact with them, the volume ball had a smooth upward and downward motion. There was no excessive movement or resistance, adjustments to the volume were comfortable. Both minor and major adjustments to the volume were possible with the ball, and I never over shot my intended listening levels. The include remote had a good weight as well, each of the buttons had excellent resistance alongside an audible click. I found my self more often using the remote than the top mounted buttons.

Aside from the noisy ball bearing buttons, the Hugo 2's USB inputs also proved less than ideal. In fact the entire left flank of the chassis on my demo unit suffered from obvious wear and tear or simply adequate build quality. The USB inputs for data and charge had far to much play in them, and there were visible gaps in the chassis around them.

Additionally, the demo unit I had operated at exceedingly hot to the touch temperatures. During the time I had it, I was unable to comfortably keep it on charge for the required 24 hours need to activate desktop mode. Seeing as it was a product I spent equal time with in my hands, as on my desk, I ran the unit almost exclusively on the battery. If I needed to charge it I was only comfortable charging and listening for 2 hours. Usage while charging beyond that 2 hour time frame resulted in the demo unit I had getting hot enough to leave a slightly darkened warm spot on my wood desk for around 20-30 minuets. Touching it wasn't painful, but hot enough to instill a sense of caution. Hence-forth my impressions Hugo 2 were completed from battery operation only. Running exclusive on battery power, I was able to achieve an average of about 7 hours of playback time.

Functionality is straight forward on the Hugo 2, it accepts Optical, 3.5mm Coax, USB Mini Input and Blu-tooth digital in. It features 6.5mm, 3.5mm and L/R RCA analog output, functioning as a head Amp via a series of transistors in the DACs analog output stage and offering a fixed line out. While I noticed no change in the sound quality moving in-between the different analog outputs, the digital inputs each offered significant changes to the overall sound quality.

Specs of the Unit are as followed from Chord's Website:

Chipset: Chord Electronics custom coded Xilinx Artix 7 (XC7A15T) FPGA
Tap-length: 49,152
Pulse array: 10 element pulse array design
Frequency response: 20Hz – 20kHz +/- 0.2dB
Output stage: Class A
Output impedance: 0.025Ω
THD: <0 .0001="" 1khz="" 300="" 3v="" font="" rms="">
THD and noise at 3v RMS: 120dB at 1kHz 300ohms ‘A’ wighted (reference 5.3v)
Noise 2.6 uV ‘A’ weighted: No measurable noise floor modulation
Signal to noise ratio: 126dB ‘A’ Weighted
Channel separation: 135dB at 1kHz 300Ω
Power output @ 1kHz 1% THD: 94mW 300Ω
740mW 32Ω
1050mW 8Ω
With only the included hardware, I was able to test USB and Optical Inputs on the Hugo 2. While I do own a Digital Coax source, I did not have an RCA to 3.5mm digital Connector. Nor did Chord include an adapter from digital RCA to 3.5mm Coax, honestly give the price I would have expected them to include ALL necessary digital inter-connectors. Still, they were fortunate to ship the Charging cable with multiple regional cord adapters!
Additionally, kindly take a moment to refresh your self on the meaning of terminology I use to describe sound, also please note that my Audio GD NFB10ES2/Hifiman HM901->PicoPower serve as my current reference point, as such I've grown accustom to a brighter sound signature from my Dac.

As such, I found the overall sound quality signature of the Chord Hugo 2 to be;

• Natural
  • Does not exaggerate
  • Presents a strong from the body timbre
• Excellent Micro Detail
  • Less ambient noise or lacking emphasis of macro detail
  • Cleaner more balanced transients and resolve of timbre
• Smooth Dynamics
  • Micro dynamics are excellent
  • Macro dynamics are adequate
• Black Background
  • Very little noise
• Internal Amp has some mid range warmth/bloom
• Softer relaxed presentation

• Intimate imaging
  • Excellent depth and airy sound, with a slightly forward mid-range

This basic presentation does not change regardless of the digital input, what the digital inputs changed were the overall blackness of the background and the precision and size of the image as a whole. The worst digital input into the Hugo 2 was still phenomenally black compared to using the same input into my NFB10ES2.




Starting with Optical from my iRiver H140, I found this input to be atrocious, the highs were very hard and the imaging and resolve were hazy. If the world ends and all I have IS my iRiver H140... I'll be content but otherwise there's no situation in which this input is preferential.



USB Input was a BIG step up from Optical. Starting with USB Mobile, there were immediate gains in imaging and noise. USB Mobile presented a more clearly defined image presented again'st a blacker background which allowed transients to resolve more fully. Though USB Mobile still had some emphasis up top, not as bad as Optical but still not perfect.

Moving to USB Desktop, I ran ASIO Output from Foobar 2000 into the Chord Hugo 2. The image as a whole was even sharper, there was even LESS noise than USB Mobile without the touch of emphasis up top. Which resulted in marginal improvements to the resolve of micro detail.

With regards to the analog output, I did find the internal amp of the Hugo 2 had a touch of mid mange bloom to it, when testing it with an LCD XC, my HE 4 and my Nhoord Red V1. The Line Out was marginally cleaner, though the only benefit I found to using the line out was for more power or to pair your headphone with another amp for a better dampening factor.




I actually enjoyed the LCD XC when pair'd with the Hugo 2. A lot of the LCD XC's weakness were compliment or masked over by the strength's of the Hugo 2. Though I was using a WyreWires Red Cable, as the lender who allowed me to barrow this didn't like the stock option and opt'd for me to hear his LCD XC with only after market options!

In particular when enjoying Igor Levit's Take on Aria, the Hugo 2 LCD XC pairing had an excellent mix of tactility and nuance for the piano piece, the more intimate sound of the Hugo 2 help'd give the LCD XC just a little more low body presence.

In Miles Davis "So What" the often overly metallic presentation of the horns on the LCD XC, was more natural. A touch of warm vibrato in the horns especially became more apparent. The softer sound of the Hugo 2 pair'd beautifully with the amazing solid planar bass and cup resonance of the XC. In some tracks, I felt there was a lack of grip, but overall the Hugo 2 brought a much needed relaxing sound to what is other wise a very SHOUTY headphone.




I was shocked at how well the Hugo 2 drove the HE 4 in particular! Ultimately though, the internal amp's lack of power combined with a softer presentation from the DAC it self robbed the HE 4 of the super exciting character I appreciate it for. Losses though in tactility, low end texture and speed were offset by gains in timbre and transient resolve.




This pairing was by far my favorite! The Nhoord Red V1 is a DIY Grado style headphone. Featuring lower bass extension than a typical Grado. The overall sound of this can in particular is most similar to a Grado RS1i. That said, the headphone has a tendency to ring a little, the Hugo 2 presented both a beautiful warm mid range that DIDN'T have the ring I was used to! Overall for this Grado Style headphone, the combination was nothing but pleasant! More so than any of my current in house rigs sadly...




Speaking of, I was very impressed with how the Hugo 2 paired with my ZMF Eikon and Garage 1217 Project Ember II. This was another really beautiful pairing I'd like to try and forget!

Though the BEST sounding combination was from the Hugo 2 was with the Head Amp Pico-Power and my HE 4. The sound was harder, more exciting with the same improvements to timbre and resolve but without a lot of the exaggeration I'm used to! But the combined price of the two units, upwards of $2800 MSRP, makes a situation I doubt any one will realistically find them selves in 2017. As a hard to drive inefficient open back planar from 2011 is not a realistic portable headphone. In the last 6 years, there have been an influx of very efficient open backs as well as powerful portable products to pair them with.

Finally, I took the time to compare the Hugo 2 to a few of my existing Rigs.

Starting with comparisons to my NFB 10ES2. For these comparisons I had the Hugo 2 fed via USB with ASIO Out, and my NFB10ES fed with Coax from a Schiit Etir fed with ASIO Out.

In short, the Hugo 2 Dac section had every edge in it's presentation of timbre. Being very true and focused on the music it self, in contrast yo the NFB10ES2 had to much emphasis on macro detail it often simplified transients. By doing so it creates a great deal of excitement and energy, which when pair'd with it's more expansive sound stage is impressive... but ultimately a little distracting at times. The Hugo 2 was more intimate with a less exaggerated sound and a stronger focus on the music it self, macro detail took a big step back. The combination of a blacker output of the Hugo 2 and more intimate imagine result in micro detail taking a step forward! The only flaw of the Hugo 2 compared to the NFB10ES2 is it's more intimate imaging can be marginally less precise and it sounds very flat. The sound of the Hugo 2 presents minimal vertical space, where as the NFB10ES2 presents an image that has more room up top and down below and all around. In some cases it's closer to reality, though more often than not it sounds over defined.

Moving to amplification, the NFB10ES2 only had an edge when more power was needed. So with the harder to drive HE 4 the NFB10ES2 presented a more consistent sound, where as the Hugo 2 while offering better timbre, because of the lack of power was also at times very hazy with it's imaging and presentation of the low end. The Hugo 2 lacked an accurate sense of time or speed with the HE 4 as well when compared to the NFB10ES2. Other wise, for dynamics and more efficient Planar's the Hugo 2 output was blacker with a less exaggerated more natural sound.



I paired both the LCD XC and my Nhoord Red V1 with the balanced out of my LH Labs Geek Out v2+ for a comparison to the Hugo 2.

Ultimately, while using the white filter on the Hugo 2 and the Green Filter on the GOV2+, I found the Hugo 2 to improve on every aspect of the GOV2+. The two shared a similar sound signature, but the Geek Out V2+ sounds a bit noisy, cramped and exaggerated compared to the Hugo 2. The GOV2+ often simplified lot of transient information like the NFB10ES2, especially in comparison to the Hugo 2, which more clearly resolved audible textures such as the vibrato in the release of many of instruments.



This comparison was a real eye opener for me, I haven't spent much time with my HM901 since I started working full time and haven't had a need for a transportable system that I can listen to. I'm either at home, or on my feet moving, a situation in which if I'm going to drop something I'd like it to be pretty cheap. Though I'm starting on my second degree here in a few days so I'll once again be in front of my laptop away from home for longer period's of time. A situation that's perfect for a transportable dac/amp combo!

In terms of sound the HM901 [Vintage Filter] fed into the Pico Power traded blows with the Hugo 2. The HM901 Pico Power combo had more precise imaging, an equally black background, a smidge of emphasis on macro detail, is marginally less resolving of micro detail but had stronger more clearly defined dynamics and a better presentation of time. It's only flaw being that it can be a bit over sharpned, or over defined. The Hugo 2 while resolving micro detail better, presents more intimate imaging and sounds a touch romantic. It's not as dynamic, and doesn't adapt as quickly to changes in tempo either, very exciting passages of music lacked some energy in comparison to the HM 901 Pico Power combo, especially with Planars. While more natural sounding, it's sometimes a bit to relaxed in comparison to the HM 901 Pico Power combo.

Ultimately different genres play better on one than the other, I grew up listening to a lot of live jazz bands. Listening with the HM901 Pico Power takes me back to my days sitting in the grass listening, the energy they presented and their ability to change and adapt around very unique time signatures always impressed me. The HM901 Pico Power combo embodies that energy, that excitement, that audible sense of speed. Where as on the flip side, my father owned a 12 String Gretsch guitar when I was a kid, listening to Chet Akins or any Spanish guitar Sonata's through the Hugo 2 reminded me of listening to my dad play at night before bed. The sense of intimacy and naturalness is very real, where as the HM901 Pico Power sounds a bit exaggerated with this genre and others like it.

The real question I have now is how does the HM901 Pico Power compare to my NFB10ES2... that's one I'll have to explore that at a later date.



Our last comparison is the NFB10ES vs the Hugo 2 when fed into my Project Ember II driving the ZMF Eikon.

With the Hugo 2, the Ember II and ZMF Eikon were breathtaking to listen to. The Eikon's sound signature is music focused, with a black background, a solid low to mid range response and a tapered top end. It does an excellent job of resolving just enough macro detail to keep things interesting, but always places emphasis on the music, micro detail just pops with this combo! The Hugo 2's DAC output embodies much the same traits, minus the top end tapering. It was ultimately this combination that allowed me to grasp just how exaggerated my reference SABRE 9018 DAC really was. Still, moving from the stunningly beautiful sound of the Hugo 2 back to the more exaggerated NFB10ES2 did give the Eikon a bit more dynamic response with a larger more open sound stage at the expense of total resolution and clarity. Even worse there is a touch of noise on the analog output of the NFB10ES2, so listening above an average of 84 dBs I lose even more resolution. Thankfully, my reference listening level is 85 but still the lack of headroom on the NFB10ES2 get's annoying.

For the price, I don't feel the Hugo 2's sound quality compares well to dedicated desktop solutions. It runs too hot and isn't priced competitively at $2379 MSRP. Though it's closer to and sometimes under $2000 if your comfortable buying second-hand from reputable sources. I feel it compares well to my own portable DAP solution, especially considering that 4 years ago I spent $1500 on a portable dedicated High-Fidelity Digital Audio Playback System.

Being my first Hi-Fi purchase I paid MSRP for my HM 901 back in 2014, an it too suffers from the same excessive play in it's buttons. Plus doesn't even have a remote, and not only that but it's limited to just playing music from the SD card loaded into it. While it fit my life style back then, it doesn't fit into my own an increasingly mobile life style now. The Hugo 2 can plug into my phone allowing me to listen to music, and still take phone calls without having to even remove my headphones. Even better, starting this year my cellular provider allows me to make and receive phone calls through my existing mobile number via a web app on my laptop. With the Hugo 2 and ASIO Output in FooBar 2000, I can be on campus and have access to my music library, have the flexibility to switch right into a YouTube video in my browser, watch and listen to material related to my course work, take a Skype call with my boss or a traditional call from my wife, without having to unplug anything. The Hugo 2 integrates into my life style with all of my existing tech, as opposed to a standalone DAP which serves as a separate system just for music. Thus isolating me from my other technology, forcing me to pick ONE system to listen to. Fortunately my Geek Out v2+ does the same, integrating with all of my Tech, but doesn't offer near the level of quality as the Hugo 2 or my HM901 PicoPower combo. Which means I have to compromise sound quality in exchange for flexibility and convince. In my eyes, based on how I live my life now and moving into the future the asking price for the Hugo 2 is validated. As it does more than my standalone DAP without compromising quality.

In conclusion I can confidently recommend the Hugo 2 as a transportable solution. It's value is in it's portability, if your need a portable solution the Hugo 2 is an excellent choice. It's input flexibility, uncompromising phenomenally natural sound, well built included remote, and surprisingly powerful internal amp allow it to integrate into a variety of portable playback systems. It's a product that integrates well into the lifestyle of some one who's traveling often, either in the air or on the road. Student, working professional or in my case both, it's a one box solution that plugs right into what ever graphic interface your using and has plenty of power to drive most high-fidelity headphones. It's definitely a plug, play, sit back and enjoy experience. Presenting a happy union of convenience and superb sound quality!

Disclaimer: I received the Hugo 2 as part of a the Canadian Hugo 2 Tour put on by Moon Audio and organized by Relix. So thank you first off!

Reviewer Background & Bias

My intentions and where am I coming from: first off, I think its important that I give you a brief on my own biases. I’ve heard great things about Chord, and have read a number of Chord's posts including those in the Sound Science forum that have made me take interest. I have heard top of the line DACs and amps before but mainly for floor-standing 2-channel setups. Mostly Classe and Rotel, but only for periods of hours here and there over a span of years.


In my experience, I feel obsession and gear can get in the way of creativity and enjoyment. Not just for music listeners, but also for the musicians themselves. The long and short of it, if someone was to come to me and want to know what the best audio experience can be had on a budget I would just point them in the direction of a JDS Labs O2/ODAC + HD660S, tell them to listen to quality files (lossless or high bit-rate) and most importantly quality recordings across many genres. I’d also tell them to stay away from these forums and just enjoy the music. I’d assure them, that they would be getting pretty much the best experience in headphone audio possible and that they are best to not go down the rabbit-hole.


Of course, I read similar advice over a decade ago, and here I am.

Overkill

The Chord Hugo 2 is pretty much an outstanding, full-featured unit, that is made to what appears to be very high-standards, by a boutique electronic manufacture. This is reflected in the cost.


I have a friend who is an incredible intelligent electrical engineer. He can build pretty much anything, but mostly makes controls for HVAC systems for skyscrapers. Custom hardware and software. His stuff is more costly than off-the-shelf, but is made to the highest spec. To me that’s what the Hugo 2 is.



Down to the Sound



Well, truth be told, its effortless, and I feel like I can listen to it continuously. It’s audibly transparent as far as I can tell. I feel like comparing it to a known reference like the O2/ODAC will invite either scorn or contempt for my post so I’ll leave it there and I think that says enough


Again, I’m a skeptic, but I’m open minded to say that although I may not be able to entirely discern or distinguish all the differences, it doesn’t mean that an overall effect is not transmuted to the brain. That would be very difficult to measure. I feel like with the Hugo 2, perhaps I’m drinking the cleanest possible water. Yes, I have water sources that are healthy, but with the Hugo 2 it is near the purest possible. For an audiophile, drinking from the Hugo 2 may bring lifelong benefits. Or not…





It’s Not About the Sound



What? Isn’t this how its marketed? Well, yes, and I won’t pretend to really understand the very basics of electronics. But I do understand marketing quite well. I would say that on sound alone, you may be able to find less expensive or perhaps even more ‘pristine’ options - perhaps even Chord’s Dave. Really, it’s the entire package that is on offer here and is what I think can justify it's expensive. Whether you need all these functions is up to you.



Crossfeed Options


The crossfeed functions are well implemented and I had no trouble distinguishing between the different settings. For those having difficulty, just listen to some earlier jazz recordings where you have some hard-panning. One of my test pieces for this review was John Coltrane Blue Train 24bit 192 khz and all the settings worked very well. This is one of the best crossfeed implementations I’ve heard. In some software based implementations, I’ve heard issues with the bass becoming to overblown and other artifacts.


Wireless

I did have a bit of issue with the wireless setup and my iPhone, it didn't quite sound right. :/ But really, why would one bother with wireless with a DAC like this?

Final Thoughts

For those who need the most functionality for desktop and portable, may find the Hugo 2 hit the sweet spot.

I'm a simple man
I write what I hear and not gonna use any artistic terms

This is...

a Chord Hugo 2.

From the image you can see I placed it on a XSabre DAC.
What about my past experience:
I have tons of Headphones and Dac Amp experiences including TOTL eg. XSabre DAC, Mojo, ifi BL, ifi iCan, Heron 5..etc HD800, TH600, HD6xx, 400i, Elear, TH900..etc OK enough with my experience!

This review is gonna be short and straight to the point.

Source: Mostly 44khz and 96Khz from Foobar2000
Comparing with: XSabre>Heron5 and XSabre>iFi micro iCan SA
Pairing: For now I have HD800 and that's the headphones that I do like to find the best dac amp

Lows: High impact, not boomy and it is well controlled (neutral to me)
Mids: Lots of details and im impressed with the size form (can be musical sometimes)
Highs: Not overly extended which I preferred (not the best for HD800 for highly electronic music)

Comparing:

XSabre>Heron5
Lows: the lows on Heron 5 is a tad better for HD800 cuz it give a lil more meat


Mids: Hugo 2 shines better which gives better airier mids with a lot of details
Highs: Heron 5 is a better pair with HD800 that roll the treble a lot smoother
Conclusion: these 2 gives different signatures. Hugo2 is more toward musical analytical and Heron 5 is musical enjoyable.

XSabre>iFi micro iCan SA
Lows: Poof the Xbass just blows everything. The Xbass is well design which not making mids sounds bad. Or perhaps a tad killing the mids? but who cares with HD800, you'd really need some lows!
Mids: Compare to Heron5, this has a tad more details (but really small). Hugo2 has kind of the same signature of the mids but with better meat. iCan is like trying to achieve the Hugo2 signature but a bit tinny. Compare to the price? Why not.... XSabre helped a lot though
Highs: Both Hugo2 and iCan is not the best for HD800 but bearable. Not gonna let your ears bleed for sure. Just Heron 5 is a well known with the smooth laid back signature.
Conclusion: iCan could give impressive result with smaller price tag but remember I pair it with $1000 dac.

Conclusion:

Hell yeah, this $2k price tag can compete with TOTL <$2k desktop dac amp. If you do really need it to be mobile, yes this is the best shi* you could get but prepare your bank.
If you stay at home, you can try to find other dac and amp combo which actually have tons of variation to make you desktop dac amp shines to your audiophile* life.

So far, HD800 is a better pair with XSabre>Heron 5 that I have. Certain tracks, Hugo2 can give a better Sound Quality, but to enjoy? This Xsabre>Heron5 are the best to keep with if u have HD800.

Also from what I read and listen in a review video, Chord Hugo TT will give you more musical experience compare to Hugo2. So, prepare you bank and get that instead!

One more of the sexy Hugo 2 picture for you to enjoy!


Ps: I deducted one star because of the price which you can get better if you need a desktop dac/amp. I would give 5 if I am a portable type of guy

The Chord Hugo 2 is a nice evolution and step up from the original Hugo. If I could only have one DAC/headphone amp, this would be it! The Hugo 2 can be used portably on the go (although not quite as conveniently as the Chord Mojo), or permanently in the home or office. It even includes a remote.

The chassis and overall architecture is definitely not as refined as on my desktop Hugo TT however, and while the Hugo 2 has more digital taps in the FPGA and this can certainly be heard and appreciated, the TT includes things like supercapacitors, galvanically isolated USB and a more beefy chassis and better analog stage, all things which contribute to the sound.

While the Hugo 2 sounds really excellent, I found it's sound signature slightly leaner and less-sweet in the midrange spectrum only, than both the Hugo TT and the Mojo. Hugo 2 is still a great joy to listen to though I did find myself longing for a bit more of that lush, almost tube-like vocals and electric guitars that seem more 'right on' in my other Chord devices.

Vocals with the Hugo 2 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 there's a sweetness with the Hugo 2 towards the highs and overall resolution. The different filters that you can set help a bit in making the Hugo 2 a bit more warm and lush sounding, but even the most warm one was still not as warm as my other Chord devices. I also believe it's best to use the Hugo 2 in the most resolving filter setting (White) as that will let you take full advantage of the higher number of digital taps and provide the most detail retrieval, so it's almost like you may as well use that most of the time. (Rob Watts has called this filter setting almost like a mini DAVE!).

I also like the crossfeed feature in the Hugo 2. I use that mostly in the low or medium setting when listening to headphones with my Hugo TT and also tested this with great results in the Hugo 2. The Mojo doesn't have this although I don't miss it that much when listening to the Mojo, it's something that is certainly nice to have.

The Hugo 2 still has impact when called for such as when listening to hip-hop or EDM. I'm happy to report that the sublime Chord sound is there with aplomb. Hugo 2's sweetness however tends to lean towards a more crystalline type of sound signature and therefore sounds a bit more solid state than tube-like than both my Chord Hugo TT and my Mojo.

I really want to purchase the Hugo 2 though I don't know if I can justify it given that I own the other 2 Chord devices.

Equipment and headphones used:
Sony MDR-Z1r
Audioquest Nighthawk
Audioquest Jitterbug (USB input)
iMac 5K
iPhone 7 Plus
Only lossless AIFF files or high res/MQA files were played via Roon (Onkyo player app on iPhone)


I also did a video review as well, if you're interested:

INTRODUCTION

The Chord Hugo 2 is a transportable DAC/amp built around an FPGA DAC using digital filters designed by Rob Watts. At the time of this writing, most US retailers were listing it for $2495. One landed in my possession a couple of months ago and now it’s time to give it a rundown. A word of warning, though: this review is LONG. The Hugo 2 is loaded with features and thing to talk about, so get comfortable.

TL;DR

The Hugo 2 is loaded with handy features that make it useful as a transportable unit, even though its size prevents it from being a realistic on-the-go solution. The sound quality from its DAC is outstanding with excellent resolution, strong timbre, and excellent dynamics. The amp section is quite picky about what headphones/IEMs it pairs with, but when it matches well is capable and provides plenty of power with all the strengths that the DAC provides. If you’re looking for hi-end audio that you can put in a suitcase or backpack and use to listen at a travel destination, or just want a solid desktop or 2-channel DAC with the option of moving elsewhere to listen, the Hugo 2 is a compelling product.

KNOW YOUR REVIEWER

My preferred genres are rock/metal and classical/orchestral music. I’m getting to know jazz more and enjoying quite a bit. I also listen to some EDM and hip-hop. My hearing quirks include a high sensitivity to midrange frequencies from just under 1KHz to around 3Khz, give or take. My ears are thus quick to perceive “shoutiness” in headphones in particular. I describe “shoutiness” as an emphasis on the ‘ou’ sound of ‘shout.’ It’s a forwardness in the neighborhood of 1KHz and/or on the first one or two harmonics above it (when I make the sound ‘ooooowwwww’ into a spectrum analyzer the dominant frequency on the vowel sound is around 930Hz, which also means harmonic spikes occur again at around 1860Hz and 2790Hz). In the extreme, it can have the tonal effect of sounding like a vocalist is speaking or singing through a toilet paper tube or cupping their hands over their mouth. It can also give instruments like piano, but especially brass instruments, an added ‘honk’ to their sound. I also get distracted by sibilance, or sharp ‘s’ and ‘t’ sounds that can make ssssingers sssssound like they’re forssssssing esssss ssssssounds aggresssssssively. Sibilance does not physically hurt my ears nearly as quickly as shout, though. It’s distracting because it’s annoying and unnatural. Finally, in a new clause in this section, I’m discovering that I have a preference for more subtle detail. I like good detail retrieval and hearing what a recording has to offer, but I prefer that presentation to what many would consider relaxed and subtle rather than aggressive of detail-forward. To my ear, more subtle detail-retrieval sounds more realistic and natural than aggressive, detail-forwardness. There is a balance here, though, because detail retrieval can get too relaxed and that can sound unnatural, as well. Readers should keep these hearing quirks and preferences in mind as they read my descriptions of sound.

FEATURES & BUILD

The Hugo 2 is a high-quality DAC, headphone amp, and Bluetooth receiver packaged with a decent battery and stuffed into a rather compact aluminum box. It’s a little too big to fit in a normal pants pocket or coat pocket to be carried around on-the-go. The design is transportable, seemingly meant to be used while stationary but basically anywhere it can be carried to. Let’s first talk about all of these features in a little bit more detail, and include some discussion on inputs and outputs.

DAC Section

Chord has been a champion of the FPGA – Field Programmable Gate Array – method of digital-to-analog conversion. I’m not an expert on the ins and outs of how that works, so here’s Paul McGowan of PS Audio explaining the basics of it. Rob Watts has designed some excellent digital filters to upsample incoming signals and get them ready for the gate array to handle. The Hugo 2 can process PCM signals up to 32 bit and 768 KHz and up to DSD512. An interesting feature is its ability to accept a dual-coaxial input signal. Chord’s M Scaler can upscale incoming signals to 768 KHz and then output that signal over two coaxial cables, with each cable carrying 384 KHz signals. The Hugo 2 has a 3.5mm phono TRS phono input that can accept that dual cable signal. I did not get a chance to use this as I didn’t have access to an M Scaler. But, it’s an interesting feature I’d like to explore someday.

There are 4 digital filter presets. The first is called “incisive neutral” which has a very neutral signature and excellent detail retrieval. The second is incisive neutral with a high frequency roll-off. The third is “warm” and the fourth is warm with a high frequency roll-off. The warm filters use a lower upsampling rate and sacrifice a touch of detail. Chord says that the incisive filter with high frequency roll-off is optimized for DSD playback.

Amp Section

The amplifier section, as I understand it, is more like the output stage of the DAC. Chord’s website states that this output stage is Class A. The rated power output is 94mW at 300Ω. There is both 6.3mm (1/4 inch) and 3.5mm (1/8 inch) TRS, single-ended headphone outputs. There is also a pair of single-ended RCA stereo outputs for connection to an external amp. The headphone and RCA outputs are all wired together, in this case meaning that their outputs are identical. The Hugo 2 has a “line-out” mode, but that is just setting the output level to the voltage of a standard SE output. This warrants a couple words of caution. First, if you have headphones or IEMs plugged in, particularly sensitive ones, don’t enable line-out mode as you’ll likely overdrive the headphones. Second, the Hugo 2 can output much more voltage than most amps can handle via their SE inputs, leading to a lot of distortion.

Chassis and Connections

The Hugo 2 is a good-looking unit, IMO, with its aluminum shell. There’s also a bubble window with a magnifying lens in the top showing off some of the innards. There are 4 buttons for filter selection, input selection, crossfeed setting (yes! There are crossfeed filters!), and power. There’s also a rotating wheel for volume control. All of these buttons and the looking window are on the top panel and are backlit:



There is also a window for IR sensor for the remote control. This window wraps around on three sides, giving quite range of ability to receive remote control signals.

Let’s talk more about this backlighting. It can light up like Vegas with lots of different colors, but the colors all have meanings. All four of the toggle buttons are capable of glowing different colors, each with their own meaning. For example, the filter button is white for filter 1, green for filter 2, orange for filter 3, and red for filter 4. The light inside the window changes color with PCM sampling rate or DSD signals. The volume wheel moves through the colors of the rainbow with red for quiet through violet for loud. It takes some time to get used to what all the colors mean, but in time it becomes a very quick and intuitive way to tell what’s going on with the unit with just a glance. It can look cool. Here’s a picture I took when I first got it in a dark room:


DAC or deep-sea submarine? Lol.

My one complaint is how bright the lights can be, and also how dim. There are only 2 brightness settings and they are both a bit on the extreme side. Here’s normal brightness:



Yes, that is as blinding in real life as the photo suggests. The dim setting works well in a darkened room:



But can be very difficult to see in a daylit room, or just with my desk lamp on with just its lowest setting:



The three lower buttons on the left are the same color as they were in the dark photos above, but it’s not easy to tell with the desk lamp on, is it? If anyone from Chord reads this review, a brightness setting in the middle of these two would be great on an eventual Hugo 3, please.

Another thing those photos show is that the inputs and outputs are on either end of the case. In the above photos, the USB inputs are on the left. They are micro-B. Some may complain that they should be USB-C connections. I imagine a future Hugo 3 they will be. But, let’s remember the Hugo 2 launched nearly 4 years ago when micro-B was far more common. Even so, those micro-B ports are quite snug. Even though I bought this unit used, the USB cables fit in tightly and never accidentally pulled out. There are two ports because one is for charging the battery and the other is for audio signal. The right side contains the headphone outputs, analog RCA stereo outputs, 3.5mm coaxial input(s), and a Toslink optical input. Having wires sticking out of both ends made it a challenge to fit on my desk with the way it’s arranged. However, I discovered this smartphone stand on Amazon (you see it pictured here) that props it up nicely and makes it much more desk friendly.

Some astute readers will notice I have an AmazonBasics Toslink cable plugged in. A subset of those astute readers will likely scoff at such a low-quality optical cable, or even at the use of an optical cable at all. I sorta agree. It’s not a great cable and the Hugo 2 is getting into the range of gear quality where you can tell. For serious music listening I either use a direct USB connection to the PC or a coaxial connection from a Singxer SU-2 digital-to-digital converter. Why is optical plugged in? That opens the door to talk about a feature I really appreciate about the Hugo 2, and it’s a similar comment to the Unison USB connection I talked about in my Schiit Bifrost 2 review. The Hugo 2 never breaks its USB connection to the PC. Once it’s plugged into the PC (or DAP) via USB its connected. If you switch inputs, the connection remains. This makes navigating exclusive modes and other sound-producing apps much easier. My computer’s motherboard has an optical output. I have Windows 10 set to use the optical output as the default. I use that connection for web browsing and general system sounds. I use USB, or the connection through the DDC, for the exclusive mode on Audirvana for serious music listening. That way I can listen to music through exclusive mode, get bit-perfect sound, and then switch over to the optical input if I need to hear something from a different app briefly. The Hugo 2 allows that to happen seamlessly without having to end the exclusive session and break the USB connection. The Bifrost 2 also did this, even Schiit’s Modius at $199 does this. Thank you, Chord, for getting this feature right. Many DACs are not this far along with their USB implementations in this simple ergonomic regard yet.

The USB isn’t perfect, though. There’s no galvanic isolation. I think this was done to facilitate connections with mobile devices like DAPs and smartphones. But, if you have a noisy PC – and I do, unfortunately – ground loop noise and the like will pass right through. The red and white plugs you see in the photos above are for an RCA ground-loop isolator. That helped a lot. There is no ground loop noise when I connect my Cayin N6ii DAP via USB, though. It’s definitely a computer problem on my that I haven’t been able to chase down yet.

Finally, there is Apt X capable Bluetooth on board. I didn’t use it much. What little I did suggests it’s solid, but it’s certainly not on the level of a good wired connection.

Deep Breath…That’s a lot of features. But, I think we hit the highlights. Onto the…

SOUND

DAC PERFORMANCE

Test Gear

As a DAC I used the Hugo 2 to feed a HeadAmp GS-X Mini, Violectric HPA-V200 and HPA-V281, and Cayin HA-1AMK2. Those amps powered a Beyerdynamic DT-880 600Ω, Sennheiser HD-6XX, Audeze LCD-2 prefazor (revision 1) and LCD-24, Abyss Diana Phi, Fostex TH900 with Lawton purpleheart chambers, and HiFiMan HE1000v2 (aka HekV2). Sources included a Windows 10 PC running Audirvana playing local FLAC files or Qobuz streams. I also used a Cayin N6ii DAP connected with a USB-C to micro-USB cable.

Sound Signature

Chord’s language refers to the Hugo 2 as ‘neutral’ and ‘incisive’. I largely agree. From a perceived frequency response standpoint ‘neutral’ is fair. From the DAC I don’t hear any noticeable emphases or recesses in the audible frequency spectrum. Some might quibble that the upper treble is a bit too forward, but I think that is largely recording and gear dependent. I found that the treble could get a little too hot with some amps and/or headphones. Thankfully, filters 2 and 4 roll-off the highs just gently enough to bring that treble back into a more comfortable, dare I say ‘neutral’, range most of the time. With my HekV2 I used filter 2 a majority of the time. At the opposite end, the bass is quick, detailed, and punchy. The only thing the Hugo 2’s bass arguably lacks is some rumble or grunt. This lack of rumble won’t show up in a frequency response chart and generally doesn’t show up while listening. I only noticed this when directly comparing to other DACs (see comparison section below). ‘Incisive’ is also a fair term as there is a fair amount of emphasis on detail retrieval. At times, and with some music, this detail retrieval can be a bit artificial. Other times it sounds wonderful. It’s tricky here…the detail retrieval is very good – I don’t want anyone to think it’s poor – but I’ve heard better resolution at the price point. The Hugo 2 puts a little bit of emphasis on the fine details it pulls out which can and does work well in certain settings, and not so well in others.

Spatial Presentation

The sense of space is another challenging aspect for which to find words. With most material and playback gear, the Hugo 2’s spatial presentation is quite good. Sounds are placed accurately and believably, there is good depth and height, good layering, and good separation. Within the presented soundfield things sound like they are about where they should be and differentiated from other sounds well. I say ‘within the presented soundfield’ because there is an oddity that pops up sometimes; to my ear it sounds like the music is happening in a smaller area of a much bigger space. In some sense, particularly with more intimate live recordings like chamber music, string quartets, etc., the space where the sounds are coming from is appropriately intimate but the space surrounding the instruments/players sounds artificially large. It’s like hearing that you’re in a cavernously large space but not getting all of the echo and reverb that typically happens in real life in such spaces. It’s an odd sensation to feel like your listening space is enormous but the music is being presented in a much smaller space. This sensation is not universal, though, at least not for me. It happens with live, small scale acoustical music mostly. With Rock, metal, hip-hop, EDM I don’t notice it. With bigger acoustic music like symphonies or pipe organ music, the sonic space filled in that perceived space quite well.

Timbre

The timbre is a strength of the Hugo 2. Voices sound like voices. Pianos sound like pianos. Guitars sound like guitars…and so forth…to an excellent degree. I’ll keep this subsection short because there’s little more to say on this point other than “bravo, Chord.”

Macrodynamics

The Hugo 2’s DAC provides a very active, punchy perception of dynamics; there is a fair amount of physicality here. The leading edges of sounds are well defined, and in the low end, can hit hard. In this case I don’t hear any overemphasis as can sometimes happen with the detail retrieval. I don’t notice the physicality showing up when it’s not needed or desired. However, when a bass guitar strung is plucked aggressively, you can tell. Kick drum hits are quick and punchy. The macrodynamic capability is another highlight of Hugo 2’s DAC performance. It is appropriately punchy when it needs to be, but this aspect does not get in the way when it’s not needed.

Amp Pairings

Because of the at-times artificial sounding detail retrieval, some care needs to be taken in matching the Hugo 2 with an external amp. For my preferences, the Hugo 2 matches best with a warmer, smoother, big-staging amp. I had really good results with the Vioelectric HPA-V200 and HPA-V281, for example. I also really like using the Hugo 2 as a DAC when there are tubes somewhere in the chain. Going direct to my Cayin HA-1AMk2 tube amp was a treat. The detail-emphasis of the Hugo 2’s sound was balanced out by the euphonic glory of tubes and created a listening experience that was both convincingly resolving and pleasant. I’ve also used a Schiit Saga preamp connected to a Parasound Zamp V3 and Definitive Technology SM45 speakers in nearfield listening. That too is an excellent combination. I think for most listeners caution is warranted when plugging the Hugo 2 into brighter, more analytic amp. When I had the HeadAmp GS-X Mini in for review, I thought the Hugo 2 sounded ok with it – very dynamic and punchy – but it lacked a bit of smoothness and some of that detail over-emphasis came through moreso than with the warmer, smoother Vios or tubes. All of these comments are subjective, though. There are certainly audiophiles out there who will love the double-dipping on the incisive, detail-oriented sound. If that’s what you like, then the Hugo 2 will do it for you. I tend to be a listener who pairs analytic/incisive/neutral DACs with warm & smooth amps or vice versa, not both on top of each other.

General Comments on DAC

I don’t want the above criticisms to be misconstrued. More often than not, I find the Hugo 2’s DAC performance to be very engaging and enjoyable. When paired with a warm, smooth, big-staging amp, I really enjoy the Hugo’s incisiveness, timbre, and spatial presentation – outside of the narrow range of genres I already mentioned. The good news for me is that intimate acoustical music is something I listen to quite rarely. I’m more of a rocker who also takes his classical big, bombastic, and 1812 Overture-y, so to speak. Even then, I recognize that many listeners will like that “big space/small stage” sound, or maybe not hear it at all. If that’s you, then this product could be unreservedly amazing for you.

‘AMP’ PERFORMACE

The word ‘amp’ is in quotes because the amp section of the Hugo 2 isn’t an amplifier as we would typically think of one. It’s a more robust output stage of the DAC. I don’t know all the details, but the output stage is an extension of the FPGA voltage switching implementation. Because the ‘amp’ is the output stage of the DAC, you can never not hear it when you’re listening to the Hugo 2. Setting the Hugo 2 to ‘line out’ mode only changes the output stage’s voltage output to a preset value that works with most preamp inputs. Because you’re never not hearing the ‘amp’, all of the sound observations I made about the DAC section apply here as well. That same incisiveness and detail-retrieval comes though. Those same excellent timbral characteristics and spatial presentations also come through. The difference is whether that neutral signature or the macrodynamic punch comes through, and that I found to be VERY headphone dependent.

Amp Test Gear

The collection of headphones I had on hand to test the Hugo 2’s amp capabilities include a subset from the above list: LCD-2 PF, DT-880, HD6XX, TH900 w/ Lawton purplehearts, and HekV2. For most of my headphone testing I used my Cayin N6ii DAP with a USB connection between the DAP and Hugo 2 and the DAP set to output bit-perfect streams. This testing was done mostly while laying on my couch…life is rough sometimes. Absent are IEMS. This happened for 2 reasons: 1) I don’t particularly like IEMs as I have extreme difficulty getting good fits and appear to have some irritation in response to silicon tips, and closely related is 2) I don’t own any IEMs right now.

Synergy Matters

While directly driving headphones the Hugo 2 can exhibit a wide range of behavior. Its character changes more dramatically with headphone pairing than any other amp with which I’ve had experience, but this change in behavior seems to be somewhat binary. The Hugo 2 sounds either very full, powerful, and in-control with all of the sonic benefits I described about the DAC; or it sounds thin, bright, and (IMO) overly aggressive and harsh. With my LCD-2PF, the sound was stunning. All of the strengths of the LCD-2 were preserved (warmth, timbre, relaxed yet still resolving, deep and punchy bass) and the Hugo 2’s detail-forwardness brought a welcome (for me) increase in perceived resolution. I can see Hugo 2 + LCD-2 being my on-the-couch listening setup for the foreseeable future. The HD6XX is also surprisingly good with Hugo 2. Even though the Hugo 2 is rated at 94mW of power output at 300Ω it sounded very full and robust with 6XX. I dare say it sounded nearly as full, rounded-out, and rich as the 6XX does on a good tube amp. I must say nearly though because there was a last bit of bass extension and lateral imaging coherence that my Cayin HA-1AMK2 tube amp and Monolith Liquid Platinum hybrid amp can deliver through 6XX that the Hugo 2 couldn’t quite get to. But, for a transportable, listen anywhere setup? Oh, yeah. Good stuff. My DT-880 also sounded wonderful at lower listening levels. That fullness and detail were present. The downside here is that the 600Ω load certainly reveals the limitations of the Hugo 2’s ability to power a headphone. Once the volume gets to a generous-but-still-modest approximately 70dB average, the DT-880 starts to go sharp and sibilant in the treble, as Beyer cans often do with many amps. Even so, I think it’s a reasonable hypothesis to say that however Chord does their amplifying through the Hugo 2, high impedance dynamic loads are a good match. My TH900 Lawton is a mixed bag on Hugo 2. It seems to be quite track-dependent. There were some tracks – “Elk Hunt” from the film score of the 1992 The Last of the Mohicans being an example – where everything sounded full, powerful, etc. Then there were others, a lot of rock and metal tracks (where a thick midbass presence is essential to the ‘heavy’ sound) started to get into thin and bright territory. My HekV2 was simply not a good match. Regardless of track, it sounded thin and bright and very sharp in the treble. That stands in stark contrast to when the Hugo 2 is used as a DAC and my Vio V281 is used to power the HekV2. That chain, to be quite frank, is the one that made me absolutely fall in love with the HekV2.

These changes in sound are mostly relegated to the frequency response domain, with a little bit of macrodynamic punch change. Even with the headphones where the Hugo 2 sounded thin and bright to my ear, all of the resolution was present. When the Hugo 2 sounded full and rich, the resolution was still present. It seems to be in roughly the 100-500Hz range where the ‘issue’ crops up with some headphones. I do of course recognize that this is a sound that some will prefer. If that’s you then the Hugo 2 is really easy to recommend. If you prefer more midbass/lower-mid presence (me!), the Hugo 2 can still be a good option as a transportable amp if care is taken with headphone pairing.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER PRODUCTS

I’ll quickly compare the DAC performance of Hugo 2 with a similarly priced desktop/rack DAC in the Holo Audio Spring 2 Level 2, which I reviewed here: https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/holo-audio-spring-ii.25162/reviews, and the Berkeley Audio Designs Alpha Series 2 DAC.

Comparing the Spring 2 L2 and the Hugo 2 happened early on in my time with Hugo 2. In my S2L2 review I said:

“The Hugo 2 has a more intimate soundstage, more akin to the [Soekris] dac1321 than the Spring 2. Both the Spring 2 and Hugo 2 image and separate sounds very well. It was hard to pick out any differences there. The Hugo 2 has a more analytical signature and a more energetic sound, emphasizing transients more than the Spring 2. I think the Spring 2 Level 2 may be slightly more resolving, but the Hugo 2 comes across as more detailed initially because of that emphasis on the transients. That same emphasis also gives the Hugo 2 noticeably punchier, at times almost tactile, macrodynamics, particularly in the bass. That also leads to more bass texture from the Hugo 2 than the Spring 2. The Spring 2 extends into the lower regions more than the Hugo 2, however, consistently having more rumble in the low end. Kick drums illustrate the differences in the low end quite well. With the Hugo 2 the initial punch of the kickdrum can almost be felt, but the weight of the bass tones that vibrating drum skin creates is pulled out more by the Spring 2. The Spring 2 also has a smoother, more relaxed presentation throughout the entire frequency spectrum. At times, the Hugo 2 could sound like it was announcing its detail retrieval, whereas the Spring 2 was just quietly going about retrieving details, doing the job without having to be noticed.

My preference between these two DACs comes down to musical genre. For classical/acoustic music, I prefer the Spring 2. It’s smoother nature, more expansive staging, more natural-sounding detail retrieval, and the slightest edge in vocal and instrument timbre, work together to create a more realistic and believable soundscape for those genres. For more energetic or aggressive genres, like rock, metal, EDM, or hip-hop, the almost tactile attack and overall transient response of the Hugo 2, while still having excellent imaging and timbre, are more engaging and connect me to the music more.

With both at roughly the same price level, I’m comfortable saying that the Spring 2 and the Hugo 2 sound different but neither is clearly across-the-board better than the other. The choice of Hugo 2 over Spring 2 will come down to sound preferences, preferred genres, and matches to use cases.”

After more listening I think that is still an accurate assessment.

The Alpha S2 and Hugo 2 DACs sound remarkably similar in terms of signature and overall presentation. They are both “incisive neutral” and have excellent timbre. The Alpha S2, at $5000 MSRP plus the cost of a good DDC if you want to use USB connection, is clearly superior in its detail retrieval, spatial accuracy, timbre, macrodynamic impact…basically everything…as it should be for the price difference. However, to my ear the Hugo 2 still acquitted itself well in comparison. Flipping back and forth between the two with my V281 amp the most noticeable differences are that the Hugo 2 is not as resolving in microdetails and that it pushes the center image forward. To the former, there can be a slight veil at first that fades with listening but is present every time I switch. To the latter, the center image feels a bit closer to my face with Hugo 2 than with Alpha S2, and that creates a slightly disjointed overall spatial presentation as the rest of the soundfield is further back. These are things that I never noticed with Hugo 2 until the much more expensive Alpha came along. Also, the performance gap between the two DACs decreases some when the same DDC I use to feed the Alpha also feeds the Hugo 2. The gap doesn’t disappear, but it does get smaller. You can read more about that here. To me the comparisons with Spring 2 and Alpha S2 suggest to me that as a DAC alone, the Hugo 2 is competitive at its price point. Throw in that it’s transportable and also a capable headphone amp for some headphones, and it becomes quite the package.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I rather quickly developed a strong like for the Chord Hugo 2, and even though I have a higher end DAC in my main setup now, I’m happy the Hugo 2 is still around. It has earned its place in my collection because of its transportability, and to have as an option to build an entire second system around. I have plans to slowly build a dedicated 2-channel system and having an extra DAC of this caliber around is a definite plus.

The Hugo 2 is excellent as a DAC and it comes with the ability to amplify some headphones and IEMs extremely well in a package that can be picked up and moved about and not tethered to a wall power outlet. There is excellent timbre, overall fantastic spatial presentation, great detail-retrieval, and a healthy dose of fun, macrodynamic punch in this sonic package. It’s not perfect, as no audio product is. Sometimes that incisiveness can get in its own way and not all headphones sound their best when powered directly from the Hugo 2.

Still, the Hugo 2 is an all-around excellent product that offers a quite unique feature set. Even at nearly $2500 I can argue that it’s a bargain given its combination of performance and features.

Thanks for reading another book of a review all. Enjoy the music!

I am very grateful to Chord for the opportunity to spend two weeks with their new Hugo2 DAC (£1799) as part of the Hugo2 UK tour.

I am the happy owner of a Chord Mojo since its release (using my second unit), and I have to say I was hesitating to sign up for the Hugo2 tour as I was a bit worried I might not be able to enjoy my Mojo anymore after I have heard and returned the Hugo2.



It is difficult to talk about Hugo2’s sound in different points (bass, mids, treble etc.), as the listening experience is so coherent, complete, one whole. When you go to a live concert, you do not start to analyse the mids and the treble, you are just enjoying the experience. It is similar with Hugo2, therefore I won’t spend paragraphs explaining these parts separately, but talking about the sound in one bigger section.

Most of my listening was done with my Audioquest Nighthawk (also liked by Chord engineers), and I also tried my Flare R2pro IEM. The source was my computer (+Jitterbug) with Foobar2k bitperfect, mostly Flac files and some DSD.



(English is still not my first language, so excuse me for any unconventional wording.)

Box, package, built quality:

Hugo2 comes in a nice quality box with a generous amount of accessories. (No accessories with Mojo, keeping the costs as low as possible.)



Built quality is exceptional, as you would expect from a device at this price point. Only the plastic remote control (which is extremely handy) felt a little bit cheap compared to the device itself.



The remote control proved to be very useful. It works in wide angle, so you do not necessarily have to point it straight to the device. Having dedicated buttons for different inputs on the remote makes selection much easier than pressing the same button several times on the DAC, often missing the input source you want just to start the circle again.
I also much prefer setting the volume on the remote instead of turning the large marble button on the device which is a bit stiff and changes volume quite a lot for even a small movement.



Sound:

As I mentioned before, listening to Hugo2 is a coherent, complete experience. Hugo2’s sound is much closer to reality than Mojo’s.
Three things are immediately obvious apart of the more natural sound: 1,the soundstage is much wider on Hugo2, or I would rather say Mojo feels narrow. 2, Much more details are coming through on Hugo2 and 3, the sound has much more thickness, body, weight and impact, especially the bass.



Hugo2 feels much more dynamic with more energy, Mojo sounds light, thin and sometimes lean in comparison. Mojo is not bad at all, still beats pretty much every DAC I heard under £1000, and with its natural sound definitely beats all the portable DACs I have heard.
However in comparison to Hugo2, Mojo feels like it is just trying to be like the new Hugo2. Mojo still does not sound artificial like most other DACs do in its price range, but it feels it is just mimicking the naturalness of Hugo2. Like Hugo2 was the ‘real deal’ and Mojo tried to be like its bigger brother. I have to admit, Mojo does this mimicking job extremely well for £399, but LeBron James’s 9 year old cousin will never beat the NBA star, even if he has some good moves for his age.




Despite of the bigger soundstage on Hugo2 I feel I am closer to the music and to the instruments, therefore it is a more engaging experience. Any distance between the music and the listener disappears. Hugo2 is much more refined than Mojo, the sound is punchier, the presentation much more accurate. I can’t emphasize enough the weight, texture, body and thickness of Hugo2’s sound compared to Mojo. It is much more realistic with much more details.



Bass kicks much harder, and the sound and instruments have a better contour, definition.
Everything feels to be in its place, and I am not just talking about imaging and instrument separation but the whole sound experience. I would not change anything in Hugo2’s sound, it just gives you exactly what you need from bass quantity (and quality) through soundstage to natural voices.
I found the crossfeed function very useful. From the three levels of crossfeed I preferred the medium setting. The lower setting was not enough for me to provide a natural experience, the highest setting sometimes came through as exaggerating this effect, medium setting was just perfect, loved it. (Crossfeed offers a natural, ‘room like’ experience vs. the conventional stereo separation.)
I heard minimal differences using the filter settings (additional warmth, treble roll off). Most preferred the completely neutral setting with my Nighthawk. On brighter headphones however these filters might be useful.



Hugo2’s sound feels very coherent, one whole complete. Mojo in comparison falls apart a little bit into bass, mids and treble sections, almost giving the impression of a ‘W’ sound while Hugo2 is completely linear. (I am not talking about graphs here, but an impression of sound presentation.) Mids on Mojo are more forward compared to Hugo2, and certain instruments sometimes can overshadow the less prominent parts of the music, while on Hugo2 everything is in line, and everything is more equally audible. More space + higher resolution = more details.



In my opinion Mojo’s sound has one advantage over Hugo2, but I have to talk about Hugo2 first to be able to explain this. Hugo2 offers a very complex and very satisfying listening experience, one thinks about words like ‘bliss’ and ‘perfection’, when it comes to describing the sound. This hugely satisfying experience however demands all your attention all the time. When you are listening with Hugo2, you can do nothing else just be with the music. After a couple of hours I felt I had an experience, and my brain needs a little rest. (The way you feel after watching a long but good film.) Hugo2’s sound is not fatiguing at all, it is a smooth and realistic sound, but compared to Mojo it contains much more information for the brain making it a more intense listening experience. With Hugo2 I couldn’t browse the web and listen to music at the same time (which I occasionally do), as it was just too much. Mojo with its lighter and leaner sound is an easier listen, more gentle to the brain. Mojo doesn’t demand all your attention all the time, but you can still be immersed in music exclusively, if that is what you want to do (and most of the time that is what we want to do, with some exceptions).
Hugo2 has more power and dynamism. Bass and everything else feels much tighter. Also the space where the music is happening is much more natural on Hugo2: effortless and lifelike, where Mojo again feels like it is just trying to mimic that space.
The Bluetooth function of Hugo2 worked easily for me, many will find it useful.



Conclusions:

The first conclusion of these two weeks is that Mojo performs extremely well for £390, which is only 22% (!) of Hugo2’s price. The second conclusion is what an impressive level of sound quality can be achieved, if money is not an issue. Hugo2 is an obvious step up, another world compared to Mojo but it comes with a hefty price tag. If you can pay £1799 for your new DAC without surviving on bread and water for three months, then buy Hugo2 right now. The rest of us will keep on enjoying Mojo for a little longer.

Thanks to Chord and Craig for organizing the Hugo2 tour in Canada. There have been many excellent photos and reviews on the Hugo2 already on Head-fi. I would like to first provide the context of my review, so that readers can benefit maximally from my comments, and also not to be misled either. I am a late 40s guy who enjoys the headphone experience that have a pretty flat FR, but also enjoy and am probably more tolerant of the more pronounced treble. I am not well-versed in the audio/headfi terminology and tend to use plain language to describe my experience. I have owned and still own a variety of planar, dynamic and electrostatic hps and accompanying DACs/amps, but the rigs I use the most are the HDVD800, Oppo HA-1 and Gungnir (non-multi bit)/Bryston BHA-1. As for headphones, the main ones are the HD800, LCD-XC, and Oppo PM2.

Well, in a word, the Hugo2 is transparent. It does not colour what is coming into it. I tried various combinations of DAC/AMP with the Oppo HA-1 and HDVD800, and at the end of the day, the Hugo2 provides to me more clarity than the other 2 desktop setups. So, in what matters the most, the Hugo2 puts out the most details, and will let your headphones dictate how you want to experience your music. I thoroughly enjoyed the Hugo2 with my main headphones, more so than the Mojo (from memory) that I had before. The Hugo2 is also solid to feel and hold.

For a desktop setup, it is nice and small as you can see from the photo. I am not sure how many of us would truly use it as a transportable, and it is too big as a portable for most. So, I would say it is certainly a desktop replacement for those looking for one. I was feeding it with a Fiio X5 and Sonos connect as well.

As you have heard from others, the controls on the Hugo2 are unique and for some, the lights on it at night may bother some, but they do have a lower level setting. Personally, I did not hear any difference between the filters, but that may be because I don’t have golden ears. The output power was certainly sufficient without any discernible distortion or clipping.

The remote control is fantastic for volume control as I usually listen to my music at night with lights out and eyes closed. That by itself is a great selling point as not all DAC/AMPs have a remote. I did not use the Bluetooth feature, but stuck to optical and coaxial and they worked flawlessly.

The one downside is the price of admission. However, if you are going to replace your desktop rig and space is a premium, look no further…you also then have the ability to transport it at minimum in your house, and if so desired, perhaps to work. I am seriously considering selling my 3 rigs and replacing it with the Hugo2….but honestly, I just like having lots of toys…and so, probably 3 toys are better than 1 for me. Having said that, the rational thing to do is get the Hugo2, save money, save space and enjoy the music.

I used both Hugo V1 and Mojo, we all know how successful Chord is on the market. When I first heard the Hugo V1, I rediscovered the meaning of imaging and layering. Hugo V1 was the best portable device I’ve ever listened to. Until now. Chord renewed and improved the legendary model and presented us the Hugo 2.

Before the review shenanigans, I would like to thank to Chord and @Relic for the tour opportunity.

You can read it also on quantumears.com



Specifications & Highlights

● Chord Electronics Custom Xilinx Artix 7 FPGA Chipset

● 10 Element Pulse Array Design (49,152 Tap Length)

● Class A

● Incredibly low output impedance (0.025Ω)

● Power output @ 1kHz 1% THD: 94mW - 300Ω | 740mW - 32Ω | 1050mW- 8Ω

● It can be considered light for a DAC/AMP! Only 450 grams.



Testing Equipment

● Earsonics S-EM9 with PW Single Core & Eros

● NocturnaL Atlantis

● Oriolus Forsteni with PW No.5

● AAW A3H Pro v2




Accessories | Box

Just like Hugo v1, v2 comes with a fairly durable, stylish cartoon box. Accessories are good. Here is the list of ‘em!

● Charger (Switchable Plugs)

● USB Cable

● Optical Cables

● Remote! (This one shocked me the most, it’s good touch, Chord!)



Design | Build

The design itself looks very good and build quality is top notch. Although I must say, I am not a huge fan of the ballsy design (pun intended).

One other thing is I really like the little window located in the middle of the device. It’s a great touch and it feels like it’s the engineer’s signature. Rigid contour overall makes it look fierce and wild!



Sound Signature

The Hugo2 has this generally neutral sound with a touch of warmth. It’s a quite musical and high-resolution device.


Treble;

Treble became my favorite section of the audio spectrum thanks to Hugo 2. Very natural, well-spaced and it’s not laid back. You can hear instruments reaching their brightest point on the spectrum and somehow Hugo keeps them out of the “hot” area so no piercing crispness. The treble is smooth. I auditioned AC-DC - T.N.T album with Hugo 2 and S-EM9. It was an incredible experience. It had an amazingly clear presentation and there were no congestions, even in the fastest passages. You can hear every single bit of detail and layer in the timbre. When I listen to music using Hugo V1 or V2, I tend to listen the parts that has the most intense upper frequencies. I found myself listening to Le Trio Joubran, Ibrahim Maalouf and similar artists. Treble is just delightful!


Mid

Mid frequencies are tad forward. The note thickness is balanced beautifully. It is neither thick nor thin. I believe this greatly contributes to naturality. Mids are relaxed and they feel realistic. Detail level is really high, it doesn’t skip any micro details. Both male and female vocals are articulate and fluid.. I believe I can listen to Norah Jones all day long… The overall presentation is smooth and effortless, I did not notice any harshness in the upper mid section. I listened to Ibrahim Maalouf – True Sorry (one of my favorite test tracks) with the Hugo2 and violin guitar tone accuracy took my breath away.. I enjoyed every second of it.

I don’t really have any complaints about of the midrange.


Lows

Lows are sufficiently prominent, natural, clear and detailed. Also, they are very controlled and tight. The lows are well defined and they are present enough but, honestly I would love to have a little more bass. Well, this is my personal preference of course. Bass quantity, in fact, very near to natural with a touch of warmth.

When you compare bass against the rest of the spectrum, they are not extremely dominant and they do not overwhelm the other frequencies. There is no overpowered boom-like basshead crazy bass. Sub-bass has an average impact field. It does not hit from a wide area and It only goes deep when the track calls for it.


Soundstage, Speed, Timing & Dynamics

Hugo2 has quite a wide soundstage. Compared to Hugo 1, the soundstage is a tad more spacious and wide. Although the margin is small. Soundstage depth is also quite satisfactory. Instruments are scattered widely across the stage and the space between them eliminates any congestion. This helps with the speed and PRAT. Let’s talk about dynamics. Well. I’ve not heard anything quite like this. Maybe LPG. This department of Hugo 2 can be labelled as unrivaled.



Comparisons



vs. Chord Hugo 1

Both devices are musical and technically very capable. Hugo2 is generally better than V1 in almost everything. Better transparency, wider soundstage and resolution... Power delivery is similar. With the S-EM9, I was listening at the “green” level with the Hugo v1. It did not change with Hugo 2. Micro detail revealment is better with Hugo 2, treble and mid section has increased articulacy. Margins are not huge though.


vs. iDSD Black Label

Black Label is a terrific DAC/AMP. Just like Hugo 2. I see them in different fields but I’ll say couple of things anyway. Both of the devices have relaxed, effortless sound with a dark background. iFi’s XBASS is magical. BL bass has the upper hand, it is more impactful and deep. Soundstage-wise Hugo 2 is more layered, more spacious and airy. I think they’re the top contenders of both price ranges. 500$ and 2000$. Both of em’, great buys!


vs. LPG

Dynamism and resolution. Both devices are absolutely great at this. Hugo 2 is tad more detailed and tad faster. LPG is a worthy rival but it falls short in mid section. Hugo 2 sounds very effortless and relaxed whereas the mid section of LPG feels stressed and aggressive. Also there is a huge soundstage difference. Hugo 2 has this wide headroom and airiness. LPG does not have this, at all. Depth-wise they’re on par.


vs. AK120

I listened to Ibrahim Maalouf - True Sorry with Hugo 2 and immediately I started to play with AK120.(I really love the AK120 and I won’t sell it) but sound was horrible when I listened. Muddy, treble was like a rolled-off, veiled. Of course, I am not comparing with AK120. I just want to know how good Hugo2 sounds when I listened head-to-head. The Hugo2 has a seriously amazing top end when it comes to the high frequencies and I'm afraid that there is no another device that can stand in front of the Hugo2 in portable devices territory.




Verdict

Hugo 2. Did I like it? Definitely, yes. It is very desirable. Built like a tank, top tier sound quality, and you can use it as DAC on almost all devices.

Still, I have several complaints about the device;

First one is about the filters. Hugo2 comes with 4 different sound filters.

● 1th- Dave/Reference filter (White),

● 2nd - HF roll off (Green),

● 3th - Mojo filter (Orange),

● 4th - Mojo HF + (High Frequency roll off) (Red)

When I tried to change these filters while playing music, I could hardly feel the sound differences between them. The change of sound was very subtle. I auditioned those filters with all the IEMs I have but the result was almost the same. Filters just had subtle differences and unfortunately, I did not find them very functional.

My second complaint is about the battery life. The battery life is about one hour less than the Hugo 1. I think, maybe the new “light-balls” are shortening the battery life. They’re so lit that you can even use the device as a nightlight beside your bed. (or signal the batman, dunno)

Apart from those, there is nothing I’d count as a weakness. I cannot easily say “Throw your V1 into the garbage, get a V2!” Hugo V1 is already a very good device and it can be found at fairly affordable prices.

To finalize, I can say that Hugo2 is a great little product from Chord and it’s definitely a good buy!

Caveats for testing preferences

1) Although I am a Chord fan from the launch of CH1 and TT, I am not an extensive audiophile with 4 dacs, 8 HP, 4 amps etc..May not have golden ears either.
2) I am doing this review from the perspective of what interests me. Is Ch2 worth the upgrade from CH1 and was all the hype mean for my TT
3) I will be fair and honest but I am picky so what gains or not gains my desk space depends on audio experience primarily and dollars secondary.
4) What i like or dislike may have little bearing on what the reader likes or dislikes.

Methodology and equipment used for evaluation.

Studio

Furman Linear power supply SM2>iMac 5K roon core> audio quest jitterbug> audio quest cinnamon modified for Hugo> Ch1 or ch2> Full modded La900 or Double Helix Cables V3 type 4 litz 8 braid cable> Noble encore

Outdoor

Iphone 7 Plus 256 gig I tunes>CCK> CH1 or CH2> DHC V3 type 4 litz 8 braid>Noble Encore or fully modded LA900

I did test Hd800S using double helix Compliment 4 SE cable and susvara production SE, but this was for curiosity as I use Hugo as a portable and find encore and La900 the perfect easy to drive monitors for it.

Would like to start by thanking Chord and Xrelic for putting together this program Tour. Much appreciated and valued.

Methodology. Genres tested where electronic, jazz, vocal jazz, R&B soul, Classical and Ambient. Examples are Ruff Cherry, james Hunter, cecile mclorin salvant, The headhunters, Peter Gregson, Biosphere. In order of genres mentioned. Frankly the song list was extensive at over 40 hours so lets just leave it at that.
I would listen to a track complete for CH1 then CH2 Then TT focus 20 hours on noble encore, 10 hours on La900, 5 Hours on Hd800S and an hour with Susvara. I Only tested TT via hd800S for a few hours as Conclusions were drawn fairly quickly that its a desktop and will remain my main desktop. It was important to get back to CH1 and Ch2 as a portable. I then went exclusive for hours of CH2 on its own, to let it sink in what I was hearing and yes it did grow on me.

Build. although the balls rattle and the volume wheel can spin without effect until pressure is just right. ( its not a problem) but ch1 balls are way tighter if thats a good thing.
The build in every way is better on Ch2 from the volume being memorized to the micro c input sturdiness to the overall look weight and feel.

Filters. My gosh why? used white only and don't use cross feed on any chord device although roon does have some in its software that I modified to be less.

Conclusions. At first i found it difficult to understand the differences between Ch1 and Ch2. Ch1 rougher edges or distortion or whatever having less pulse arrays and taps does, gave me the perception of more bass impact, edgier mids and more distinct vocals and keyboards. This given a lot of the genres I like, was not really negative. But as listening went on I started to get the nuance, the tighter bass had a bit more colour and depth, the distinct mids gave a pinch more width and the smoother presentation and gave the notes a more rounded feel, smooth vocals became appealing and detailed. Is it a night and day difference, no. Chord did a very good job on the original. But it is a smoother less edgy more colourful wide presentation, albeit subtly so. The longer I listened to ch2 the more i liked it, then again the longer I listened I listened to CH1 the more i liked that as well. CH2 I had to conclude was my preferred dac over time.

La900 was scrumptious under Ch1 and Ch2 with the same subtle differences that I noticed with encore. Hd800S was the same as la900 and encore with the subtle differences between CH1 and CH2, TT played hd800S best.

While I can't speak for anyone else but concerning the burning question of should I upgrade from CH1? Well it depends on how easy one can part with 3 G CAD, how much the smoother detail is desired or the edgy colour of ch1 bothers you. Myself I will not for now, but every black friday or boxing day sale where i can get 20 or more % off I will think about it, so don't be surprised if my signature changes from ch1 to ch2 in the future.
Concerning new customers from no Dac or Mojo or whatever, just do CH2 and be done with it.

Concerning TT well Im sure CH2 will find its way on to desktops as a portable replacement, more than CH1 has, but TT will stay as my desktop until TT2 is launched. It was just better for the job all around, course I'm not sure if it was as refined but it was preferable for the job of playing my full size cans, period.

Now i can go back outside and enjoy my Encores through CH2

Not only is the Chord Hugo 2 simply the best portable DAC/amp on the market right now and simply one of the best DACs I've heard to date (tested only with headphone systems), surpassing much bigger, heavier, balanced DACs to my ears.

Reviewing a DAC might seem tricky at first, but I don't believe it will be for the Hugo 2 since I have something to compare it to directly. The improvements it adds to most systems I've used is night and day. I will write about the Hugo 2's sound in the following systems:

• Standalone portable DAC/amp powering the ZMF Ori and Blackwood headphones.
• DAC for the following headphone system: Mjolnir Audio Pure BiPolar amp, Audeze LCD-4 headphones (200 ohms version), Kimber Kable Hero interconnects
• DAC for the following headphone system: Mjolnir Audio KGSSHV Carbon amp, Stax SR-009 headphones, Kimber Kable Hero interconnects

Other DACs of note I have owned are the Bel Canto DAC 3 (used only in balanced mode), Chord Mojo, and Denafrips Venus (used only in balanced mode). An interesting sample set as the Bel Canto DAC 3 represents a high end, more traditional delta sigma DAC, and the Denafrips Venus represents one of the better R2R DACs one can buy and offers both NOS and OS modes.


I will not delve too much into how to use the device; it is button controlled but also has a remote control that I have never used. It has a 3.5mm coaxial input (44.1kHz – 384kHz – 16bit – 32bit), micro USB input (44.1kHz – 768kHz – 16bit – 32bit), optical TOSLINK input (44.1kHz – 192kHz – 16bit – 24bit), and bluetooth (44.1kHz – 48kHz – 16bit). It also supports dual BNC input via adapters using its 3.5mm coaxial input (44.1kHz – 768kHz – 16bit – 32bit). It also supports DSD64 (Single) to DSD512 (Octa-DSD). I have tested only optical TOSLINK (fed by a Breeze DU-U8 level 3) and USB directly from a Samsung Galaxy S9+, and I hear no difference.

The Chord Hugo 2 is battery powered (2x Rechargeable custom Enix Energies 3.7v 9.6Wh Li-ion (lithium-ion (2600mAh) batteries) which is charged using its other micro USB input. You can keep it plugged in without worry of overcharging, the Hugo 2 is a very intelligent device. It will even automatically set itself into a desktop mode if left plugged in for 24 hours, during which the battery neither charges nor discharges and auto shutoff is disabled.

It can be set to line level output which is fixed at 3v RMS, which is ideal if using it only as a DAC. The Hugo 2 features two headphone jacks (1/4" and 1/8") and dual RCA outputs, and the output stage is pure class A.


The Hugo 2 is a neutral sounding device that is extremely transparent and resolving, and capable of great dynamics. Not laid back at all like NOS R2R DACs or the Chord Mojo, it does not refrain from making all details extremely obvious. And it is a bass monster; if you are upgrading to the Hugo 2, expect a new body of bass dimension and much more bass slam to be added.

Of all the DACs I have owned (refer to the significant ones listed above), the Hugo 2 is the bassiest of them all, and it is not artificial bass boost, it is simply not recessing these frequencies. It sounds closest in tonality to the Bel Canto DAC 3, while the Chord Mojo and Denafrips Venus are both notably laid back with 1-2 KHz less treble extension (the DAC 3 also has 1-2 KHz less treble extension but isn't laid back sounding).

Those trying to create a laid back sound system (which is very common among high end audio enthusiasts) will have to plan around the Hugo 2 not being laid back whatsoever. I don't call it bright, it's just not laid back.

So it is neutral, extremely transparent and resolving, and has awesome bass. What else? It also has zero noise floor, breathtakingly clean treble performance when the rest of the system can keep up (this is very important), and incredibly full bodied, weighty, impactful sound for all instruments unlike every other DAC I have owned.

Strings, piano, wind instruments, horns, everything sounds and feels as if there is no barrier between me and them, as if they are right there in front of me and I can reach out and touch them - this is of course with the Stax SR-009, KGSSHV Carbon, and Kimber Kable Hero interconnects. The attack is so quick and crisp and clean, the decay is much faster, adding to the transparency, snappiness, speed, and PRaT. My other DACs sound sluggish and blurred in comparison.


Other noteworthy attributes of the Hugo 2's sound are incredible 3D sound stage and imaging, far outdoing every other DAC I've owned here too. This may all sound like exaggeration, that a DAC can make such huge differences, but I will clarify: the differences are much less pronounced on non-electrostatic headphone systems. But when used with my Stax SR-009 + KGSSHV Carbon system with quality analog interconnects, every aspect of the sound is infinitely better than any other DAC I have owned!

But notice my emphasis on the rest of the system being up to par. If using generic interconnects or Audioquest Evergreen interconnects in the Stax SR-009 + KGSSHV Carbon system, there is notable treble harshness and sibilance. The same would occur if I had a much lower end amplifier I assume. But, insert the Kimber Kable Hero interconnects, and the difference is night and day, pure magic. No more harshness, no more sibilance, so much more airiness and so much better bass slam and body, instrumental impact and weight, sound stage and imaging, attack, decay, transparency, treble extension.

So if you're hearing rough treble, it's not the Hugo 2's fault, it is something else in your system.

The filters do make obvious changes to the sound, sacrificing treble for all the people overly sensitive to it. Crossfeed presents an interesting sound stage that is more centered and in front of you, but with any of these filters I hear some degradation in transparency and refinement, so I use none.


When using the Hugo 2 as a standalone device, it is supremely impressive. Of the three test systems listed above, this is the 2nd most impressive (and I expected it to be most impressive here, but I was wrong). True Hi-Fi sound in your pocket, or bag more realistically. Only in the modern era do we get to carry around a top notch DAC and high end single ended class A headphone amp bundled in one device. For this reason, I have referred to the Hugo 2 as a necessity for any traveling music lover.

The Chord Hugo 2 alone allows the ZMF Ori and ZMF Blackwood, which are inefficient planar magnetic headphones, to truly shine. Compared to the Chord Mojo as a standalone device, I hear the following differences:

• Less laid back sound signature, upper mids to treble transition is more forward.
• Significantly cleaner upper mids to treble transition and treble response, better treble extension and a bit more "air".
• Greatly increased bass slam, bass is now much more full bodied and less recessed (biggest difference to me).
• Improved transparency.
• Slightly improved sound stage and imaging but nothing significant here to my ears with this system.

I felt the Hugo 2 was definitely worth the price difference vs the Mojo. Truly high end sound on the go, it's still hard to believe today how good portable sound can be nowadays.

The Hugo 2 also made my Schiit Lyr 3 at the time redundant, so I sold it. Adding the Lyr 3 to the chain with these headphones just slightly worsened the transparency of the upper frequencies if anything, not a big difference though.

But adding a good enough amp will of course come in handy. The Mjolnir Audio Pure BiPolar brought the ZMF Ori and Blackwood to a different level, as my reviews of those headphones describe.

Update: The Hugo 2 can also drive the ZMF Eikon with ease. The Hugo 2 + the Eikon is my new favorite portable system.

Before I sold my Stax system to move to speakers, this was the only way I use the Hugo 2 now. I don't even listen to music on the go anymore, because I've been so spoiled by the Chord Hugo 2 + Mjolnir Audio KGSSHV Carbon + Stax SR-009 + good interconnects that I no longer want to listen to anything below this.

But first, let me share my experience using the Hugo 2 with a high end non-electrostatic system, the Mjolnir Audio Pure BiPolar + Audeze LCD-4 using Kimber Kable Hero RCA interconnects with Neutrik RCA to XLR adapters. With this system, I compared it again to the Chord Mojo, and my impressions were... exactly the same as my impressions in the previous section, only less pronounced (and MUCH less pronounced than the differences with the Stax system).


The sound was slightly less laid back again, with improved and more forward upper mids to treble, with more "airy" sound. The bass improvements were still there, but less pronounced - it was a night and day difference before, but now not quite that. The difference in transparency was there but not as huge, sound stage and imaging improvements seemed about the same though.

I don't think the Hugo 2 is worth the price difference when using something akin to the Mjolnir Audio Pure BiPolar amp and Audeze LCD-4 or ZMF Ori/Blackwood headphones, but keep in mind these headphones are deliberately designed to not be the most revealing sound. A Focal Utopia with this same amp would certainly benefit more from the Hugo 2.

I suppose I got excited and already spilled the beans here, so I'll try to just fill out some remaining details. Enter the Stax SR-009, Mjolnir Audio KGSSHV Carbon, and Kimber Kable Hero interconnects (same as above). Some have noticed that I can't shut up about this combination here on Head-Fi. There's a reason for that, never before have I been blown away by an audio system or any audio upgrade that much. Not even when going from a Cooler Master "5.1" gaming headset to the AKG K7xx / Beyerdynamic DT 880, not even when comparing a Sennheiser HD 598 Cs to a Sennheiser HD 800/HD 800 S.

This Stax system is what made me really want to write this review. It makes the difference in analog interconnects and especially DACs infinitely more obvious than any non-electrostatic system.

The Chord Mojo is great for the price, but absolutely ruins this system. With the Mojo, the treble sounds like it's locked away in a cardboard box, all that air up top is trapped. Transparency is way down, many details are far less obvious, bass is gone, sound stage is now flat and two dimensional and seems to extend nowhere. Imaging is blurred and generic, the opposite of precise. And the Mojo is probably the best DAC below $1,000 (pretty sure I'd think so at least).

In this system, the Denafrips Venus sounds like a much better, cleaner version of the Chord Mojo. The Venus is in the same price range as the Hugo 2 and is a beast of engineering: isolated dual mono PSU with two huge power transformers, four 0.005% precision matched resistor ladders per channel allowing for 26-bit PCM and fully balanced 4.4v RMS output, excellent digital processing. Impressive engineering for the price.

But compared to the Hugo 2, it is too laid back, and I believe this speaks for most R2R DACs in the same price range (definitely NOS ones at least), since it is not deliberately designed to sound this way, and it reminds me of how the Holo Audio Spring DAC level 3 sounds but even worse. A lot of people will like this about it, laid back "slow" sound is really popular these days, but I prefer what sounds more realistic to me.

This laid back sound from the Venus not only really lowers treble response (but without ruining it like admittedly even the Mojo does, since this is comparing a $500 DAC to DACs valued at over 5x after all) and extension by 1-2 KHz, it really blurs/soften the attack, slows decay, and oddly/unfortunately lowers bass presence and impact, creating a slower softer sound with less PRaT so to speak.

Plenty of people like this (see all the HE1000 fans), but this reduces transparency. The SR-009 stands out for its speed, attack, crispness and clarity, and is a bass monster with the Hugo 2 and good interconnects. With the Venus, the SR-009's bass is now soft and muddy. With the Hugo 2, it's a rock concert when called for.

Ultimately this system allows the Chord Hugo 2 to shine, demonstrating that it is incredibly transparent with superior treble extension and quality, and compared to every other DAC I've owned, is so significantly superior in bass slam and body, sound stage, imaging, bringing out detail.

If you have not seen my extremely positive review of the Stax SR-009, check it out here, and realize that a Chord Hugo 2 or another similarly excellent DAC that isn't highly laid back is required for that review to be so positive. And so are interconnects at least as good as the Kimber Kable Hero, because even with the Hugo 2, so much of that magic is lost with cheap interconnects!

On a no-compromise system, the Hugo 2 injects layers of transparency into the entire frequency range like nothing I have ever heard before. The way it is able to not only clean up any treble harshness, make the attack much crisper and cleaner, and speed up and improve decay, but it is truly extraordinary how much cleaner and more transparent bass, mids, and treble all become. It opens up a window into the music that was previously sealed shut. Its improvements are hugely evident in all genres, and probably the most impressive to me in metal. Without the Hugo 2, instruments sound so much smaller and softer and less clear.

1 Context

I have been asked to write a short review comparing H1 and H2 and I have also included AK 240. To be honest, I have bought H2 because I was fed-up carrying always the 12V power adaptor with me, given I am travelling a lot, always carrying H1 and LCD-X with me (or alternatively LCD 4). I was not really happy with he sound of Mojo vs H1 because it was not structured enough. So my expectations vis a vis H2 were increentally not enormous. (Note: I did not have my LCD 4 at hand and will test later)

2 User Interface / Usability

The most important area of progress wrt H1 is clearly its usability and user interface. The fact that I can charge it on my lap top is highly aprecated, and in contrast to mojo, it shuts off when not used. To some minor degree, its form is nicer and it does not have (the agruably typical British) oddities of H1, as for example the power switch of H1. It is also nice that H2 remembers its input after switching off and it has also a remote (which I firat disregared, but must say it is handy)


3 Test Set-up

I have used Cowon Plenue P1 as input via optical and was comparinh H1 and H2 using both LCD 2 and campfire vega. The set up means that both devices get the same digital audio stream via optical input. In a first step the two Hugos were calibrated (i.e. same sound level). I used several of my favourite sound tracks to test, such as

Mozart - Le Nozze: either Kleiber or Currentzis both 24/96
Mozart - Don Giovanni - Giuliani 1961 or Currentzis both 24/96
Meistersinger - Karajan 16/44
Rinaldo - there is a very nice (very high quality recoding) with Cecila Bartoli 16/44
Tamerlano - Xavier Sabato 24/96
Verdi - Rigoletto w Pavarotti 24/96

I think it is worth noting that the type of Music used (i.e. Classical opera) consists generically analog sound and song and you can quite easily compare reproduction with original (going to the Opera such www.roh.org.uk). On the other hand a lot of operas are sound wise quite "crowded" which means you can easily see how well the DAC/head-phone can resolve this. As an interesting side remark: some of the above records have been recorded in the late 50' to early 70', analog R2R in a very high quality)

4 Sound

The most important question: is there a material difference been H1 and H2 - no. The difference between the two is not huge, certainly smaller than between H1 and Mojo, but it is clear that H2 sounds objectively more neutral (whilte filter), which manifests in a better timing and more accurate expression. It is also slightly less harsh. Again the difference between H1 and H2 to AK 240 is very materal, as can be found in many reviews.

I havee also read through the other reviews and largely share thenic characterisations, hence I will not repeat them. Overall I am very satisfied with Hugo 2, even more so since it is easily transportable.

5 Conclusion

H2 is great, but if someone owns H1, the sonic difference between the two is not material enough to necessarity upgrade. On the other hand when travelling much and always forgetting the 12V plug, this is really an option you should consider. Side remark, both Hugos are clearly better suited to drive LCD 2 than the AK 240. The difference with Campfire reduces but is still material.

6 Teaser

Introduction



Disclaimer: This review is of a production Chord Hugo2 unit as provided free of charge from Chord Electronics Inc. for the purposes of this review as part of the Head-Fi Hugo2 tour. The Hugo2 has since left my possession and is in the hands of the other tour members. The unit will be going back to Chord once the tour is over.

I don't think many people in audiophile land need an introduction to Chord Electronics, but for those that aren't familiar Chord Electronics Inc. is a small company based in the U.K. that produces high end DACs and amplifiers which are used in many recording studios and enjoyed by many consumers around the world.

My first introduction to Chord Electronics was when I was approached by Chord to head up the Canadian leg of their Head-Fi Mojo tour. Before that time I was aware of (and curious about) the original Hugo's unique implementation compared to other DACs but I never really paid much attention to it given its price and availability in Canada. The audio path I was previously on was heavily toward R2R gear for DACs and I was seeking the best bang-for-buck gear I could find. The Mojo changed all of that. I was completely smitten with what I heard and I couldn't figure out how the device could offer such sound quality with that amount of headphone drive in such a small package. Given my inquisitive mind I proceeded to find out as much as I could about how Chord's resident DAC designer Rob Watts implements his designs.

Digging deeper in to the unique implementations of the Chord DACs has led me to sell most of my other gear and acquire a Chord DAVE, their top flight DAC currently available. When Chord announced the Hugo2 and Rob shared his presentation slides and measured performance of the Hugo2 on Head-Fi I just couldn't resist being a part of the Hugo2 Head-Fi tour. Unfortunately, supply chain issues resulted in many delays and anticipation was high but the wait was long. So, now here we are, I have had the chance to demo the Hugo2 and I will report on what I've heard, compare it to the Mojo and the DAVE and hopefully be able to help clear up some questions regarding what it is and what it sounds like. There's a lot to talk about so let's get in to it.



What's Included?

The large well padded box that the Hugo2 was delivered in included:

- The Hugo2 DAC/amp unit.
- Instruction manual.
- One micro USB to micro USB OTG cable.
- One long Optical TOSlink cable.
- One short Optical TOSlink cable.
- Remote control.
- 2A wall charger with different adapters for different regions.
- One USB B to USB micro cable.

This is an improvement over the limited accessories that came with the Mojo or even the DAVE, and a very welcome addition. I think the 2A wall charger is brilliant with its changeable socket plugs and I can see it being very useful not only for sales in different regions but for being covered when travelling as well. The remote control is simple and gets the job done but it's nothing to write home about. The micro OTG USB cable works well and I had no issues using it with the FiiO X5 III or AK240 as a source.

One gripe I have is the optical cables provided are TOSlink on both ends and given that most portable devices that would connect to the optical input would have a 3.5mm optical out you can not use the provided cables without a TOSlink to 3.5mm adapter. It would be best to not use adaptors as they often limit the output to 24/96kHz, but at least one can get going right away if it was included if someone only had a 3.5mm optical source. My other gripe is that the coaxial input is 3.5mm and there is neither an appropriate cable or adapter included.

All-in-all though the included accessories are welcome and definitely a step in the right direction from Chord.



Design

As it says on the box, the Hugo2 is a transportable headphone DAC/amp. I would agree 100% with the transportable moniker as it's slightly too big to be called strictly portable. The unit measures 130mm(L) x 100mm(W) x 21mm(H). It's perfect for taking outside and lounging on the deck, or using on a sofa away from one's regular listening station. However, unless taking a backpack, a coat with roomy pockets, or wearing trousers with very ample pockets I wouldn't really consider it a portable device.

Chord has a thing for using a unique design and the Hugo2 is no exception. It follows some design cues from the original Hugo while adopting some design elements from the Mojo. It now uses illuminated balls for input selection, power on/off, and filter and crossfeed selections. The rotating ball for volume control remains the same as the original Hugo but is now raised slightly from the rest of the chassis.

I'd like to point out the out of the two units that I have sent along on tour (black and silver) both of them have a small gap between the top and bottom pieces of the chassis. This is most evident on the USB input side where one can clearly see the illumination from the LEDs shining through the small gap. I didn't mind it but it should be noted for a device at this price and caliber.


Love it or hate it the design and controls are uniquely Chord.

Chord has also kept the window for peering at the device's innards and this window also displays the incoming signals sampling rate colour with a coloured LED, which changes depending on the input signal.



I/O - Controls - Features

I/O




Digital Inputs

First and foremost the Hugo2 is a DAC, and this is evident in the fact that you can not input an analogue signal in to the Hugo2 (more on this later). For inputs there is a micro USB input which is capable of 32bit/768kHz sampling rate PCM, a dual coaxial input capable of 32bit/768kHz sampling rate PCM (dual coaxial is for use with Rob's M scaler tech which brings the Hugo2's TAP count to a whopping 1 million actual TAPs), a 3.5mm optical input capable of 24bit/192kHz sampling rate PCM, and AptX Bluetooth which is capable of 16bit/48kHz sampling rate PCM.


USB Input.


Coaxial Input.


Optical Input.

Chord specifies that the Hugo2 can handle Octa (8x) DSD but they aren't clear on the input limits of using Octa DSD. I would presume that only USB can transfer such high data rates and coaxial and optical are limited to DSD128 and DSD64, respectively. If I find out further information I will update the review.

On the USB input side there is also a micro USB port for charging. I think this is a good move from the original Hugo as it lends itself to more charging options rather than being shackled to a dedicated charger.

The USB side also has two small holes to accommodate a future add-on currently called the 2go. This will be similar to the Mojo's add-on named the Poly which has streaming functionality and a microSD card slot to access your music, while all being controlled from your smartphone. This will hopefully be a one stop solution as a source for music to feed the Hugo2, but currently the 2go features and specs are not announced and there is no release date announced at this time.

I was surprised at the range of the AptX bluetooth as I was able to get a stable connection at 30ft away with the FiiO X5 III as a source, as long as the Bluetooth window was not covered and there were no walls in the path.


Analogue Outputs

On the opposite side of the USB inputs is the analogue outputs along with the digital optical and coaxial inputs. For analogue outputs there is a 1/4 inch headphone out, a 1/8 inch headphone output and L/R RCA outputs. All the analogue outputs share the same signal path and nothing is bypassed when using the RCA outputs. Huh?! I'll explain more on this later. Just know that when using either the headphone ports or the RCA out you will be getting the same quality of sound.

The output power of the Hugo2 has been bumped up from the original Hugo and the Mojo (both of which are identical). Now you can expect to get 1050mW in to 8 Ohms, 740mW in to 33 Ohms, and 94mW in to 300 Ohms. The Hugo2 is capable of peak output Currents of 0.5Amps. Chord states that the Hugo2 will drive 8-800 Ohm headphones and I find that the power output from the Hugo2 is ample.


Controls

To operate the Hugo2 you'll want to go over the manual. Everything is controlled through illuminated balls and the colour of the ball indicates the current function or setting. The idea behind the colours is analogous to the spectrum of light. Red is a lower frequency and has less energy while ultraviolet is a higher frequency and has more energy. So, red is lower volume and ultraviolet is higher volume. Blue is full charge while red is low charge. Get it? You will but it takes a little getting used to.

To turn the unit on you press and hold the Power button until it begins to flash through a sequence of colours while it boots up. Once fully booted up the Power button displays the colour that represents the state of charge. For the volume control you roll the ball on the top of the device (the last volume is remembered except for the line-level volume preset). The rest of the functions are changed by pressing the balls and the setting will be represented by the corresponding colour. Yeah, read the manual.

So, even though all the feedback is through colours, and it takes some getting used to, I also really like this scheme as it is quick to know what you're settings are once you do adapt to it. You can see below some of the different colours for incoming sampling rate signals which is easy to register once you know what they are.



I won't sugar coat it though... this control and feedback scheme may not be readily accepted by everyone and it does take some getting used to. If you are coming from a Mojo or the original Hugo it will feel very familiar. For those that want a numerical display you're out of luck.


Features

Filters

New to the Hugo2 is the idea of filters. To really understand about the filters one needs to understand Rob's WTA filter and his approach to designing a Digital to Analogue Converter. I'll cover this in the section about the internals later. Rob has decided to include the filters as a way for owners to hear a difference between the first stage 16FS WTA filter (as in the Mojo) and a second stage 256FS WTA filter that he's implemented in to the Hugo2.

I'll admit that when I first tried the different filters I heard no difference between them whatsoever, but like pretty much all DACs the devil is in the details. The filters don't change frequency response like a tone control on an amplifier, or like an equalizer. What the different filters do is change the timing and the perceived tone through the implementation of the filter. The idea is that when the timing is not tightened up then the perceived timbre of the notes will be off. With the 16FS filter (Red/Orange) the notes can sound more loose and less defined leading the listener to have the impression of a slightly softer and warmer tone. While the 256FS filter (White/Green) is more precise and incisive leading to the impression of more attack and a slightly brighter and wider presentation.

When I listened for overt frequency response tonal changes I couldn't differentiate between the filters. When I listened for timing changes I could hear a slight difference between the filters and it became more consistent as I spent more time with the Hugo2. I guess that's how my brain is wired and I suspect many will have difficulty picking out the differences between the different filters.

Quick a/b comparisons did nothing to my perception of the differences. Listening to the Red filter for a while and then switching to White was the best for me. The sound expanded more on the White filter and wasn't quite as collapsed/intimate as the Red. almost like turning on/off a subtle version of the old wide button one may find in old audio equipment from the 90's.

Just know that using the White or Green filter is using the full capabilities of the Hugo2, and the Green filter is 256FS with a high frequency roll-off filter to deal with high frequency noise typically found in high resolution recordings. The Orange is using only the first stage WTA filter at 16FS and Red is 16FS with the high frequency roll-off filter.

Rob explains the technicalities much better than I could in this post he made in the Head-Fi Hugo2 thread - Link -. The linked post also has measurement results from the APx555, and they are impressive.

Crossfeed

Apparently the Crossfeed feature is the only thing that is the same as the original Hugo. The Crossfeed is good and not over done in my opinion. What I found interesting is that it's noticeable and useful if the song has hard panning, but unlike other Crossfeed implementations I've heard it doesn't seem to have much effect on some songs. I reckon that depending on the stereo mix you will hear more or less benefit. For a more modern example besides the likes of older songs from The Beatles, Scared by The Tragically Hip is a song that I couldn't tell much difference at all between full Crossfeed and off. Yet, Boots or Hearts by the same band NEEDED Crossfeed to help with the panning and it was quite noticeable with this song. I like the Crossfeed when it's required and would likely use it often if I had the Hugo2.

Dimming the Lights

If the lights on the Hugo2 are too bright - and they do illuminate the ceiling when at full brightness - you can dim them to a much more friendly low light level, like you can with the Mojo. When dimmed the illuminated lights become invisible in bright outdoors and are barely readable in normal household lighting conditions, but are great for dimly lit rooms. The dimming function reduces the illumination further than the Mojo's dimming.

Battery Life

The battery life on the Hugo2 is one of its biggest weak points. I was only able to get around 7 hours while using it (timed 2 different times), which is what Chord advertises, but I wanted at least 10 hours. It just seemed too short to me. You can see the variance in time between each charge level. Lap 1 is Blue charge level, Lap 2 is Green charge level, Lap 3 is Yellow charge level, and Lap 4 is Red charge level. After that it goes to blinking Red which means head for the charger now.




Additionally the unit I tested took about 6 hours to charge with the included wall charger so now there is a recipe for frustration.




Desktop Mode

The Hugo2 has a desktop mode that will bypass the battery charging circuit when left plugged in for more than 24 hours, indicated by a magenta colour for the power button. In this mode one should be able to use the Hugo2 plugged in to the wall indefinitely with no detrimental effects on the battery life. This should be a welcome addition for those that want to use the Hugo2 in a desktop scenario exclusively.



Technology Inside

This section of my review is probably the hardest to write and may be the most difficult to understand. How do I go about explaining complex design challenges and unique implementations to a general audience when I am not an engineer, or anything close to one? Well, I don't. What I can do is touch on the implementation in a basic way that will hopefully highlight what sets the Hugo2 apart from other conventional DAC/amps that are available in the wild.

In the most simple terms, the Hugo2 is a unique DAC with a discrete analogue output tied directly to the DAC. Similar to what conventional DAC's would label their line-out, and the volume is controlled digitally. There is no analogue volume pot and the sound of the analogue stage can not be separated from the sound of the DAC. It is about as transparent as one can get to the DAC with as little components as possible. On the flip side, because the analogue output is tied directly to the DAC without a separate amp like in conventional designs you can not input an an analogue signal from another DAC.


DAC

Starting with the DAC stage Rob Watts has chosen to forge his own path in DAC design foregoing both the typical Delta Sigma chip design and an R2R design. The Hugo2 uses and FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) chip to handle code for the volume control, battery charging scheme, Crossfeed, etc.. The FPGA also handles the DAC filters and runs the latest WTA filter (Watts Transient Aligned filter) which has been completely redesigned based on knowledge he's gathered from developing Chord's flagship DAC, the DAVE. As alluded to earlier, there are two WTA filters in the Hugo2. The first one is 49,152 TAPs (true TAPs) in the 16FS filter. The second WTA filter goes from 16FS to 256FS which further improves timing reconstruction accuracy as the WTA filter recovers timing to 81nS resolution. I don't expect many people to know what what I'm talking about here. Just know that the Hugo2, technically and measurably, is a large improvement over the original Hugo.

Moving from the FPGA for the DAC filters there is the discrete 10 element Pulse Array DAC, which is a significant improvement over the 4 element Pulse Array DAC in the original Hugo. What's a discrete Pulse Array DAC? This is Rob's DAC that he invented which uses flip flops to convert the digital signal to an analogue signal. Again, it's very complex to explain the functionality and again, I'll let Rob's words speak for themselves in this Head-Fi post from the DAVE thread HERE and from his Head-Fi Watts Up? blog HERE if you were interested in digging deeper.

Analogue Stage

The analogue stage in Chord DACs is very short and direct by design to reduce components in the signal path to help maintain transparency to the source. The analogue stage has no coupling caps and there are only two resistors and two capacitors in the signal path. However, the active part of the analogue stage is not simple as it employs the analogue second order noise shaper topology which corrects for non-linearity in the output stage.

When I asked Rob about the output stage in which he explained the above he also replied with this remark:

"The main source of distortion and sound quality problems when driving headphones is the output stage; this is where crossover distortion occurs, which sonically is extremely serious. Now, we can reduce this problem by increasing the Class A bias; but this only helps, it does not eliminate the sound quality and measurement issues. So to solve it I use the analogue second order noise shaper."

He provided far more technical information, but this gives the gist of what he was saying.

To set the output to line-level mode you would press the Crossfeed button while turning the device on. This will set the volume to 3Vrms and will not be remembered when the device is powered down. Line-level mode is nothing more than a volume preset and nothing internally is bypassed in this mode.

The only reason I mention the technicalities in such depth is because the implementation is very different from other designs in the wild and I feel it's worthwhile knowing how different it is.



Sound Reproduction

Here we are at the important part... The sound. All the techno-babble means nothing if the sound falls flat. I used a wide variety of tracks for my listening test from Eric Clapton's Unplugged album, to multiple binaural recordings including Chesky's Ultimate Headphone Demonstration Disc, to Metallica and AC/DC, and Opeth. Classical music was also a big part of my test tracks and I have too much to list, but a large part of the tests were from Decca's 50 CD set.

To my ears the sound from the Hugo2 sets a new benchmark for a transportable device. The sound is incisive and detailed. There is no bloom or extra reverb or tipped up treble to my ears. What I was taken aback with was the sense that the Hugo2 was very honest to the recording. It seemed very easy to hear if the recording was mixed heavily, subtly, or if the recording was a simple mic'd setup left untouched. I only heard this level of reproduction from the DAVE before and was surprised to hear it from such a small device.

Overall the sound is similar in tonality to the Mojo and DAVE, in the same family so to speak. It also doesn't feel bright or too warm to my ears and I can't say objectively neutral either. Neutral is completely relative and unless comparing directly to a live performance no one can say exactly what neutral is. The best we can do is gauge the sense of realism when listening to audio gear based on our own perspectives. Compared to most gear I've heard that would be called neutral I would say the Hugo2 falls in the slightly warm category, but like I said, this is completely dependent on one's preferences and point of view regarding what their neutral is. Frankly, I find a lot of 'neutral' gear to be bright and hard sounding.

For the ability to reproduce detail I would say the Hugo2 does wonderfully. There's a sense of small nuances that I haven't heard before except from the DAVE. While not quite at the same level of performance as the DAVE there is so much low level detail. So much dimension and depth within each note, each sound. I'm not talking about overall macro soundstage size or the ability to recognize depth in the recording. I'm talking about individual sounds have more dimension to them. Guitar strings have ample nuance from the pluck to the overlapping and decaying reverberation. With drum hits I can hear the warble of the skins after the initial impact in some tracks. Piano finger positions, key impact strength, sustain, are all reproduced beautifully and clearly. Vocal inflections are easy to pick up and that draws me in to the performance. I didn't find complex orchestration to get confused and enjoyed clearly hearing strings, brass, and percussion playing together well.

Of course, all of this is dependent on the recording mix and mastering, but on my best recorded music the fidelity is superb.

Imaging from the Hugo2 is also very good. I didn't get a sense of sonic 'blobs' in the presentation. Everything seemed to be in its place and occupy each space appropriately as far as I could tell without being at the recording session. Using Chesky's Ultimate Binaural Headphone Demonstration Disk I could clearly hear the depth and height from the test tracks. It's always wonderful to listen to a sound travel from the floor to 8 feet in the air and accurately place it with just headphones. Listening to voices call out from in front and behind the mic was spot on and I had a clear picture of where the performers stood with the Hugo2.

Similarly, if the recording was mixed flat with no spacial information then that's precisely what I heard. The Hugo2 can be brutally honest to the recording. In the end all we really have are measurements compared to the input to tell us what is transparent to the source and how far it deviates from the input and the Hugo2 measures very well in this regard, but, measurements aside, I really enjoyed what felt like a lifelike and natural presentation from the Hugo2.



Comparisons

As I mentioned in the introduction I ended up selling most of my gear when I acquired the DAVE so my comparisons are limited currently to the Mojo and the DAVE.

Hugo2 vs Mojo



On the Hugo2 vocals can be more forward or more spacious compared to the Mojo depending on the track and how it was recorded. Again, the differences in how a recording was mixed plays a part here and I feel the Hugo2 highlights this aspect better than the Mojo. With the Mojo it was like listening to baSS/MIDS/TReble in comparison. The Hugo2 has more of a overall cohesive and balanced presentation than the Mojo. The Hugo2 paints a more accurate picture of the recording and has finer nuance and fidelity.

Overall the Hugo2 has a bigger, wider, deeper presentation than the Mojo and is also more detailed and layered. The sense of 'being there' is much stronger with the Hugo2. I'm getting a bit repetitive. Going back to the Mojo seems more claustrophobic and congested.


Hugo2 vs DAVE

The DAVE is another level up from the Hugo2, no question there. What surprised me was it wasn't 10 levels up. The Hugo2 is close in tonality to the DAVE but feels a little brighter overall. The DAVE has more oomph in the bass, more impact, more gravitas. The DAVE also has even more space than the Hugo2 and feels even bigger yet in its overall presentation compared to the Hugo2. Detail is also slightly easier to perceive with the DAVE but yet very analogue sounding, a smidge more than the Hugo2.

The takeaway for me from this comparison was that indeed the Hugo2 is a lot closer to the DAVE than it is to the Mojo but definitely not on the same level.



Headphone Pairing

In general, I found the Hugo2 to have a similar effect as the DAVE regarding headphone pairing. That is to say that the character of the headphone is high-lit more than from other gear I've owned / tested. I've found that the more transparent the source gear the less of its own flavor it will add to the headphones and you are left with the naked truth regarding the headphones and the music.

Overall the Hugo2 had far and away more power on tap to drive all of the headphones in my collection and I never found the need to go much above the Red volume range, if at all for my average listening level of 80-85dB in a quiet setting (at times I did really rock out though).


Noble K10



The K10 sounds good from the Hugo2. Overall balanced and spacious sound for an IEM, if not slightly warm. Detail retrieval was really good and it didn't feel like I was missing anything with the K10. I heard a slight amount of hiss with the K10 but it was only when listening for it with no music playing.


JH Angie

The JH Angie is somewhat mid-centric and very engaging to my ears. Detail retrieval was good and because the Angie has an adjustable bass pot it was easy to dial in the preferred sound to my tastes. With the Hugo2 I ended up increasing the bass attenuator from 2:00 to 2:30. I think this was because of the overall more spacious sound from the Hugo2 vs the more closed in Mojo, which has been my usual listening source for the Angie. There was some hiss with the Angie, but like the K10 it was nothing offensive and only with no music playing when actively listening for it.


Audioquest Nighthawk

The Nighthawk is a love-it or hate-it type of headphone. I purchased it when it was half price and I love it for it's unapologetic warm, smooth, low distortion sound. I think it's a great headphone with the Hugo2 because it offsets some of the Hugo2's unapologetic presentation. This is the headphone that I relax with. The Nighthawk are a very low distortion headphone and play well with the Hugo2's measured performance. Incidentally it's one of Rob Watts favorite headphones as well and I can see why with the Hugo2.


Audeze LCD-2 (Pre Fazor 2014)



The LCD-2 had no problems at all being driven from the Hugo2 and they are a great pairing. It's easy to hear a little bit of graininess in the treble on these with the Hugo2 but overall the tonal balance and speed from the Hugo2 gave them a boost. However, I liked them more from the Mojo than the Hugo2 as the Mojo's mid-centric and smooth presentation seemed to play better with them.


Audeze LCD-XC

The LCD-XC didn't fare as well as the other headphones for me from the Hugo2. Drive-ability is not the issue. The issue is that my LCD-XC have emphasis in the upper mids / lower treble that made them sound harsh and fatiguing with the Hugo2. Naked truth. I like them from my Cavalli Liquid Gold but that's more about synergy and tonal balancing with gear. Moving on.


MrSpeakers ETHER Flow C

This is a full sized closed back headphone that pairs well with the Hugo2 to my ears. It's a little bright overall but the lower bass is phenomenal and the low distortion characteristics of the ETHER Flow headphones play well with the Hugo2. There is a great soundstage for a closed back and the listening experience with the Hugo2 is engaging and fun, especially for EDM and electronic music. So clean.


MrSpeakers ETHER Flow (open)

If the ETHER Flow C is a little bright with the Hugo2 then the ETHER Flow (open) is a little warm. They both sit just on either sides of the neutral fence for me. The Ether Flow (open) has a little bit of emphasized mid-bass that is clear and present when played from the Hugo2. The Hugo2 livened them up a little compared to the Mojo but didn't resolve as much as the DAVE with them. Overall a great pairing that has taken a lot of my head time when I had the Hugo2.


Focal Utopia

This is the one I've been waiting to talk about. The pairing of the Utopia and Hugo2 is nothing short of amazing to me. There are dynamics to spare, details to suck you in, pinpoint imaging, a soundstage and depth (if it's in the recording) to get lost in. Yeah, I tend to gush with this headphone and while I think the DAVE has a more analogue presentation with the Utopia I find the Hugo2 doesn't make me miss the DAVE as much as the Mojo does when not at my listening station. The tonal balance and sense of 'being there' is top notch. Really, I can't think of a faster and more dynamic and impactful listening experience from what is a very transportable TOTL pairing.


Desktop DAC

For its part the Hugo2 on its own is very well tuned and has plenty of drive for the headphones I own. However, there's always that lingering question... How does it sound with a desktop amp? I can say it sounds fantastic with the Cavalli Liquid Gold. I'll never say an external amp is more transparent to the source, that's not possible objectively. What I can say is that the Liquid Gold adds its sweet tonality to the Hugo2's incisive and detailed technical prowess that you get the best of both worlds. Although I typically listen to the DAVE direct, as I likely would with a Hugo2, I love plugging in to the amp from time to time for some of that sweet tonality.

I would recommend that when using the Hugo2 as a DAC for an external amp to set the Hugo2 to the line-level 3Vrms volume preset and then with the remote click the volume down 4 times to get a less hot 1.9Vrms. Some amplifiers can't handle a 3Vrms SE input without distorting. Just be extra cautious as this adjusted volume will be remembered the next time you turn on the Hugo2 and it will likely be far too loud for most headphones.



Conclusion

Well, that was a long review! I have to admit that I was surprised by the performance of the Hugo2. Even after seeing Rob Watts's presentation slides and seeing his APx555 measurements for low distortion, jitter, and the usual suspects, I was still tickled with the sound that I heard. Is it at the DAVE level? No, even though there are many things Rob has learned with the DAVE that have gone in to the Hugo2 it's still a notch behind. What the Hugo2 is to my ears is probably the best transportable device you can buy right now.

Chord has a great device with the Hugo2 and with improved design elements over the original and improved technical capabilities I have no doubt that it will be popular among enthusiasts that have the money to purchase one. It isn't cheap but it does perform in my opinion. I may have to acquire one for myself for those times I don't want to sit at my listening station with the DAVE and not feel like I'm missing much.

Thanks for reading!


Specifications from Chord:

Chipset: Chord Electronics custom coded Xilinx Artix 7 (XC7A15T) FPGA

Tap-length: 49,152

Pulse array: 10 element pulse array design

Frequency response: 20Hz – 20kHz +/- 0.2dB

Output stage: Class A

Output impedance: 0.025Ω

THD: <0.0001% 1kHz 3v RMS 300Ω

THD and noise at 3v RMS: 120dB at 1kHz 300ohms ‘A’ wighted (reference 5.3v)

Noise 2.6 uV ‘A’ weighted: No measurable noise floor modulation

Signal to noise ratio: 126dB ‘A’ Weighted

Channel separation: 135dB at 1kHz 300Ω

Power output @ 1kHz 1% THD:

94mW 300Ω

740mW 33Ω

1050mW 8Ω

Weight: 450g

Dimensions: 130mm (L) x 100mm (W) x 21mm (H)

Boxed Dimensions: 220mm (L) x 122mm (W) x 85mm (H)

Edit: Edited for clarity and grammar.

I listened to Hugo2 as part of the U.K. Tour for ten days. Subsequently, I decided to buy one and so this review is as a result of listening for around two months now. @Relic has produced the definitive review, so mine won't focus on the machine's specs.


Design


The new interface with the coloured buttons make the unit easier to use. I find the new design slightly too much in your face, but that is kind of the modern way.

The new design makes it easier to set up the unit and use the cross feed function or select the type of source eg coaxial, optical. I used the remote control a few times and it is easy to use and nicely designed.


I don't like the rattle of the four balls/buttons - I think that has an effect of cheapening the design, but that is a very small and ultimately irrelevant point versus the quality of the music that Hugo2 can produce.


Initial impressions


Wow! The first thing that I noticed about the Hugo 2 was the unbelievable stunning detail it provides. It doesn't matter the quality of the source or the genre of music, the Hugo2 will extract layers of detail. It didn't matter whether I listened through my 'steady' Sennheiser 600s, detailed Beyerdynamic T90s or my stereo speakers with my Valve amplifier, it just produces musical lushness, combined with that detail retrieval. With my Shure SE 846s, on some recordings the immediate impression was it sounded slightly bright but if you believe what Rob Watts writes that is because of the extreme detail being revealed compared to the 'warm mush' (my words) of other DACs. However, then you realise that any bass that you hear isn't missing any depth. Overall, I was suitably impressed and when I switched back to my Mojo, the difference was like night and day, with the Hugo2 being so much better. I had already sold my Hugo1, but what I find interesting is that it never was a 'step change' better than the Mojo, unlike Hugo2 which definitely is.


Music listened to : Piano & Violin concertos. A lot of Vivaldi. Progressive Rock - Pink Floyd, Riverside, tons of Yes in album , live & bootleg form. Mostly CD, but some Hirez and MP3 (320k).


A few specific examples:


Pink Floyd - Dark side of the Moon on the Introduction to Money is the superb bass and smooth saxophone, and what you can hear better is the different instruments that make up the sound compared to an overall mush of sound. I also listened to the Pink Floyd Friends' version produced by Billy Sherwood. The simple piano solo at the beginning of A Gig in the Sky was memorable.


On Animals, the opening acoustic guitar is right in your face, it could be being played right in front of you. Vocals are crisp & clear.Later on the searing, distorted guitar that wants to cut you in half. Synthesisers that soar effortlessly.Pigs snort like real ones , so realistic that it initially gave me a shock


Love - the Beatles is an interesting album as it showcases songs that you all know so well but subtlety rearranged with tons of musical quirks going on around you. So it's an ideal challenge for Hugo2. The Hugo 2 devours the music and spits it out effortlessly somehow making sense of everything that is going on with beautiful musical simplicity.


Apocalyptica Special Edition - Bitter Sweet : haunting violins/ cellos, followed by the deep bass voice and then the unexpected juxtaposition with the tenor "she's the one that I adore " - the natural timbre of voice is just as if they are singing live to you. And listening through my SE846s, there is no lack of bass.


I have mainly listened to Hugo2 being fed by Coaxial via a DX90, but also via a Sony CD player and Panasonic Blu-ray with digital out. I listened through the headphones mentioned above and also through my valve stereo Sytem, through a Denon unit & mini speakers and through the car stereo systm. Much of my listening has been done on the train with my Shure SE846s.


What I find interesting is that it just doesn't matter what medium you chose or how audiophile it is, the Hugo2 has the ability to make the end result, well, just musical bliss.


Through my Valve Amplier, the combination of the instrument and musical extraction from the Hugo2 and the sublime smoothness of Valves is simply stunning.


Like Hugo 1 ,there is little or no Mobile phone interference on the train unlike the Mojo which does pick up interference from either your phone or other ones around.


Conclusion


The Hugo2 extracts stunning detail and will reveal new layers of sound from all of your favorite CDs. It is able to pick up the unique timbre of every violin, guitar, drum, saxophone, piano etc. and to distinguish the starting and stopping of their individual notes. The instrument separation here is so good that they have a clear edge to them.


A few people have mentioned that Hugo2 is more digital sounding than Hugo1,but I don't find this to be the case. I feel it retains a very analogue sound of its predecessor. All in all it is a musical marvel.


In my old world, the differences between Hugo1 and Mojo or in fact Hugo TT and Hugo1 (when I compared the two on the TT tour), were there, but not necessarily immediate apparent. Hugo2 to my mind is that good that it was immediately clear to me that it would beat those other DACs.


For me, Hugo2 is so good, it doesn't make me want to use the Mojo in its place and in fact I have since sold my Mojo.



So should you buy the Hugo2


1. If you don't own anything remotely equivalent - YES

2. If you own a Mojo - YES (but bear in mind the mojo is portable whereas Hugo2 like Hugo 1 is more transportable, i.e. you can use it when stationary but less easily when walking around).

3. If you own a Hugo1 - YES ( but the upgrade is maybe more worthwhile/apparent in my experience through non IEMs headphones or stereo speaker set up in order to allow you to really appreciate the difference to its fullest extent)

CHORD HUGO2

As always a little something about me, I am 43 year old married man with teenage kids so when I need to "get away" I really enjoy listening to music. Im not so caught up in having the latest and greatest but just having something that I enjoy listening to, which generally comes with a higher price tag. I do not consider myself a an Audiophile in any sort of the word, but like I said someone who enjoys music.
When I first saw the Hugo2 come out after just borrowing a Hugo1 from a fellow headfier for about 3 months I was very excited to compare the two. I really enjoyed the Hugo1 with my Oppo PM3s a lot more than with my assorted IEMs that I have. So here is my simple mans review.



Boxing:
Not sure why everyone gets overall excited about the boxing, just something Apple started, but for me, as long as it secures everything during shipment Im happy. This was done nicely by Chord. All the basic accessories are included to get you up and started.



Build Quality:
The build quality seems really robust as it should for this price, however as seen in the picture below there is a gap in the middle but closed on the ends and I read that other had the same issue. Hopefully this is something they will address as this is not acceptable at this price point. Everything else seems great as for build, all the plugins seem tight and able to withstand years of plugging.



Sound Quality:
I used mainly my Oppo PM3s but also used My Alcair RSMs CIEMs and my new favorites the Isine20s which really do sound great with the HUGO2 as well and I breifly tried my DUNU DN2Kj.
Music was used a lot via Bluetooth from my LGV20 and Tidal Hifi, but also used my Onkyo DPX1 as a source for the HUGO2 as well. I like older rock but also listen to a lot of the newer stuff like Hollywood undead, Rage but also like a lot of country.

Here are some of the music I have listened to many times and my thoughts on it compared to other sources like my Mojo.
Metallica, Holier than thou- Ive heard this song a million times and know it really well, i thing I noticed right away was that there was noticeably more separation between instruments and I could really see where each instrument was. The detail was very precise with not going over board, which generally means that it would not be meant for long time listening.
Dave Matthews, Dont dring the water- Again very detailed. One thing I like about listening to Dave Matthews band is how well all of there songs are recorded, you cen tell it was done at a great studio with top of the line equipement.

Guns and Roses, November Rain- Very detailed and you can really hair the rain in the back ground which with some sources you have no idea that its even in the recording. Everything on the Hugo2 is very balanced and to me on the warm side of Nuetral ever so slightly. To some this will change as it also depends on the headphones and or IEMS you are using as there is such a thing as Synergy between all of the devices in the line.
As for the Filters, they are subtle but noticable, I used white the whole time as this was the one liked the most.

Bluetooth was really good, I could get about 30 feet which is acceptable.
As for sound comparisons I will do them if you ask but to me when you get up in the higher dollar amount everything sounds similar with certain flavors that appeal to your tastes. I could think a 100 DAP could sound better than this because of its sound sig only and thats why this is a wonderful hobby because it only matters what I think (or you, for your own personal opinion).
So if any has questions I will respond below, thanks for reading! for more inforamtional reviews there are plenty on here this is just my personal feeling on this device. If I have the extra money some day ( like after the kids get out) I would definetly buy this with some kick ass headphones to go with it.
Thanks for Reading,
Andy AKA Howdy.

Chord Electronics Hugo 2 Review by Musicday


Note: this unit is my own and not a review tour sample.


Introduction :

There is really no need for an introduction when comes to Chord Electronics. They are a well known British company that design and manufacture high end audio equipment, and few years ago they started to concentrate on the portable audiophile market. First it was Hugo transportable DAC, that was a massive success and after, they introduced the Mojo portable DAC that is much smaller and very convenient to carry anywhere you go.

Based on the massive success of previous Hugo, Hugo 2 was created to deliver as much as possible pure audio in similar small package. In this review i will mention the portable DAC Hugo/Hugo 2 and not discuss their flagship DAVE as it is in his own class, mains operated. Let’s have a look what are the main technical differences between the two Hugo:


Chord Hugo ( original ) : 26,386 taps , 4 Element Pulse Array design, supports PCM up to 384 KHz, Plays DSD64 and DSD128.

Chord Hugo 2 : 49,152 taps , 10 Element Pulse Array design, supports PCM up to 768 KHz, Plays DSD64-DSD512 ( Octa DSD ). Indeed future proof.


This are only few improved features from the previous model and i will try and cover all the others as i go along writing this review. You don’t need to be an expert to realise this is a major improvement, both internal and external.


Unboxing and accessories:

Hugo 2 arrived in a rather large box very well protected , covered in bubble wrap. Even in case of an accident everything inside would have been intact. The guys at Chord Electronics know how to pack when shipping their products.




Very big box isn’t it? For how small Hugo 2 is, but safety in transport comes first.



Included in the box are:

-2 amp USB charger, -IR remote control and batteries , -1.2 m USB to Micro USB,

-15 cm Micro USB to Micro USB OTG cable, owner’s manual. All that is included is more then enough to get you started and most likely new owners have all sorts of cables at home ready to try.







Design:

Hugo 2 is beautiful DAC to look at, and the design and build quality is per Chord Electronics, very high quality. Hugo 2 has a much sharper, lower profile design compared to the previous Hugo, with four spherical polycarbonate control buttons .Aircraft grade aluminium been used for the casework.

You can have it in a choice of two colours : silver or black. Photos don’t do any justice and you have to see it in person to appreciate the look and the feel, really superb.




Connections :

Inputs:

• 1x Optical TOSLink 24-bit/192kHz-capable
• 1x RCA coaxial input 24-bit/384kHz-capable
• 1x HD USB input 32-bit/768kHz and DSD512-capable
• 1x aptX Bluetooth (extended range)

Outputs:

• 1x 3.5mm headphone jack
• 1x 6.35mm (¼ inch) headphone jack
• 1x (pair) stereo RCA phono output

In the near future Chord Electronics are planning to release an add on module called 2Go, that will attach to Hugo 2 to allow wireless streaming capabilities and maybe SD card storage. More details are not available at the time of writing this review.



There is more user control with the added filters.

Hugo (Ultimate Reference) (White)

Hugo HF+ (High Frequency roll off) (Green)

Mojo (‘Smooth’) (Orange)

Mojo HF+ (High Frequency roll off) (Red

After trying them all the filters ,i personally use only the white one which suits my listening mode.



A quick look at the high quality paper print manual will show you how to use and adjust the Hugo 2 DAC, very easy and simple setup, far better than previous HUGO IMHO. Turn on the filters mode to fine adjust the sound according to your listening preferences.

Is great to see there is a remote control included in the box that makes operating this DAC so much fun, no matter if you use it with headphones on the move or in your audio system at home. Plain and simple and easy to operate. And there is DIM : press that button and the lights will dim , a very pleasant visual experience in the evening especially in the contrast with the black unit.





Gear used to test Hugo 2 in this review:

Source: Samsung Edge 6+, LG Flex, Shanling M2s, Asus N58V.

Headphones: Meze 99 Neo, Koss Porta Pro modified, Audio Technica ATH-CKR10, Venture Electronics Monk+ Cappucino earbuds. I have been listening to jazz, blues, rap, classical music. Hugo 2 really delivers in a a special way your music.



Sound quality:





Hugo 2 is a very detailed DAC that can reproduce the good recorded music in a way never heard before in such a small package. I didn't hear any hiss with my IEMs, and that's because of the very low Ohm impedance : 0.25 milliohms to be precise. With ATH-CKR10 the bass is tight and punchy, mids blend nicely in and the vocals are very clear. Is really nice to have so much power volume to play with when you want. My IEMs are back to life and are taken to a higher level, with a much more wider and detailed soundstage. Just feed it with quality signals to get the best out of it. I find it being more neutral, with darker background then both Hugo and Mojo, things really have changed not just the package.

Another headphone that I really enjoy with Hugo 2 is Meze 99 Neo.



A very easy to drive headphone and the synergy between the two was great. Hugo 2 can really make this rather inexpensive headphone shine, taking it a whole new level. Slightly warmer sounding headphone, I can hear the micro details. The soundstage is not big but is wide enough and precise to give you a nice and comfortable listening .

Among other things I really like the fatigue free sound Hugo 2 can reproduce. One can enjoy hours and hours of pure audio bliss without any problems ( headaches ). Also using Hugo 2 to watch movies is a great experience with immersive sound and deep powerful bass when called for.

Either using Shanling M2s, my laptop or mobile phone as a source feeding Hugo 2 the results was always great. I would suggest that everyone who will eventually get to hear or own Hugo 2 if possible to experiment with cables, sources, Hugo’s2 filters to get the most off it.



Final words and my conclusion:



There is no doubt that Hugo 2 has no rival at this price point in the DAC world. Is small enough to taken anywhere you go, is future proof with DSD 512 native playback, and also the 2 Go module later to be released for streaming .

Has lots of power to drive the most demanding headphones and is very detailed and sublime sounding. The music will come back to life with Hugo 2 and you will hear your music more lively, more realistic.

Try to hear one for yourself, the hype is real IMHO. I would like to thank both Rob Watts and John Franks and the team at Chord Electronics for putting time and lots of effort to create such a wonderful DAC . Even the most demanding audiophile needs will be satisfied.

Introduction

These are my gathered thoughts on Hugo2 while listening to Serial Number D00026 for 10 days as part of the UK Hugo Tour organised by Highfell and facilitated by Chord Electronics. Listening has been exclusively via headphones; mostly sharing my time between Audeze LCD-XC and Audioquest NightOwl closed headphones. Digital input has been provided by my iPhone 6S+ supplying CD or greater quality using Tidal, Onkyo HD or FLACPlayer. Listening devices are a pair of 63 year old ears. Music (in no particular order) was by artists such as Disclosure, Chvrches, Lana Del Ray, Kate Nash, Gorillaz, Japanese Breakfast, Pumarosa, London Grammar, Laura Marling, Grimes, Little Dragon, Shura and Bastille. Mostly I chose music I listen to regularly and which I have previously downloaded to Tidal.

Unpacking

I own a silver Hugo1 but I really like the look of the Black Hugo2 I am holding in my hand. I travelled to Bristol and twice to London to listen to prototype Hugo2 (500 miles altogether) so have seen both variants. The silver Hugo2 looks more 1950’s idea of futuristic (Chord Electronics usual style) as all of the detailing and the scalloping can be seen clearly. The Black Hugo2 just sits on my shelf and blends into the background and I rather like it.
I have a Remote Control which is still sealed. The previous trialists have not used it or Hugo’s ¼ inch jack socket. The socket is as tight as a … The manual (an A4 cardboard sheet) does not say what accessories should be included but I recently found this information listed on the Box itself. I have a mains charger with UK/US/AUS/EU adapters, a sensible length USB-A to USB-micro cable, a 15cm USB-micro to USB-micro cable and two optical cables (not listed on the Box). Elsewhere someone reported that the batteries for the Remote Control were Duracell. Mine, still shrink wrapped, are branded “GP Super”. I accept, of course, that I may not have the full retail pack.

Aesthetics / Usability

Black is good! Each end of Hugo2 contains a mixture of inputs and outputs just like Hugo1. The function of each marble is clearly labelled (unlike Hugo1) with the labelling being on the end panel along with the USB and power inputs. I didn’t use the cross-feed options and all four sound filters sound the same to me.
The wheel used to control volume is quite imprecise on this demo model. The shift from red to green seemed quite jumpy and I found it much easier to use the remote control. I could then see that the colours change in exactly the same way as with Mojo’s volume button.
Hugo2 has only a tiny LED on its motherboard to show what sample rate is being received. Coming from Hugo1 with its £1 coin sized frosted indicator and Mojo with its colour changing power-marble I found this a retrograde step. I later realised that the brightness of the sample rate LED is linked to the brightness of the marbles.
After a power cycle Hugo2 does remember which input was last selected and the previously selected volume level. After 15 minutes of inactivity Hugo2 is designed to shut down but I didn’t test this. Additionally after being mains-connected for 24 hours Hugo2 goes into Desktop mode where, according to the Manual, the battery is neither charged nor discharged. However in this mode Hugo2 is always warm to the touch. I don’t yet understand this.
Lastly, the manual indicates that the on/off marble glows blue if a one amp charger is used and white if a 2 amp (recommended) charger is used. I was surprised that the marble on this sample glowed blue when Hugo2 was not in Desktop mode suggesting that the supplied charger is not outputting the full 2 amp as specified on the Box.
I have heard negative comments about the Remote Control being of cheap plastic rather than the credit-card metal version suggested earlier in the year. However I found, with batteries inserted, the Chord-branded RC to feel solid, work well and not look at all tacky as others have opined. Author’s note: I had to get that word in somewhere; Hi-Fi Choice Magazine use it all the time!

Listening

My original plan was to listen exclusively to Hugo2 over several evenings and then revert to my Hugo and / or Mojo to see whether I felt disappointment in going back to my previous generation equipment. To date (day 5) I am still on Hugo2. From the get-go I could immediately detect an improvement over Hugo1. Japanese Breakfast was the last thing I had been listening to using Tidal so I continued with her track Boyish. My first thoughts were that the bass came through stronger and the vocal harsher with better separation overall. The harshness surprised me as I was expecting a better top end than with Hugo1. I was even more surprised when I noticed that the previous user of Hugo2 had left the red filter engaged (HF roll-off). I However I haven’t noticed any harshness on other material (quite the reverse) so I’ll put it down to Hugo2 providing a more honest rendition of the original vocal. I made a note that the brass playing on one track sounded remarkably accurate and the rendering of Diving Woman had great PRAT and sub-bass. Kate Nash’s Made Of Bricks was the most recent album I had off-lined using Tidal so was the next up. My first thought was “this sounds thinner than I remember” but realised this was an effect of the better separation causing the music to be presented in a sparser, or wider, context. The piano & cymbals on Mouthwash sounded magnificent. Moving on to Lana Del Rey’s Lust for Life I found “Love” gave me tingles and the title track had me smiling hugely. Hugo2 also allowed me to better understand my headphones. The LCD-XC having the better timing (or PRAT), meaning my foot was tapping more, and the NightOwl having the edge on the sound profile I prefer at the moment. Additionally Hugo2 has a top end I prefer over Hugo1 making Chvurches vocals sounding less brittle (than Hugo1 or Mojo) on the likes of Never Ending Circles and Bury It.

While listening I made notes whenever something in particular struck me. For example I wrote
Pumarosa: Dragonfly - sounds scary; Honey – I can understand the lyrics for the first time.
Gorillaz: Phoner to Arizona – just sounds better (than I remember), lower frequencies just better defined.
London Grammar: Rooting For You – so emotional and so integrated/whole/homogenous. Meaning it lives as a piece of music not as individual strands.
Little Dragon: Season High – this album never sounded so good on the XC’s.
Christine & The Queens: Tilted – lower frequencies improved, vocals excel

You get the idea, I’ll move on.

In summary

Put simply, nearly everything I have listened to sounded better than with Hugo1 or Mojo although some, I suspect poorer recordings, resisted attempts to improve them. More importantly the sound is much more engaging through timing and presentation. I am listening now, typing this with my laptop on my knees. It is proving difficult at the moment as my head is nodding and my feet want to tap.
On the usability front I still have some niggles with Hugo2. The volume control is more difficult to move accurately (unless I use the Remote), the inputs and outputs are still all over the place and the loss of the frosted sample rate indicator as on Hugo1, or colour changing on/off marble is a disappointment.
Will I buy one? Well, I really would like one but there are lots of other non hi-fi things to spend my cash on at the moment. Hugo2 is a much better companion to my XC’s than Hugo1 so I will be considering my options in the future. Were Hugo1 to die on me tonight then I would immediately order a Hugo2. Actually I wouldn’t since I just remembered that my Hugo1 warranty is good until next April.
Do I recommend Hugo 2 to Head-Fi members as an upgrade? Well, I found the sound balance, delivery and separation a huge improvement from Hugo1 and I found the separation a huge improvement from Mojo. However, to me, the sound balance of Mojo and Hugo2 is quite similar so Mojo owners may find the difference less compelling.
Well! You will read from the Footnote below that I totally missed the main benefit of Hugo2 in the previous paragraph. It’s all about the timing, presentation, musicality etc. I grew into Hugo2 gradually but suddenly losing it has been traumatic.

Footnote

I spent my full ten day allowance listening to Hugo2 (evenings only) and it is now a full week since I packed it up and passed it on. During the week I have found my Hugo1 and Mojo to be quite disappointing substitutes for Hugo2. I became so attuned to Hugo2 that listening has been far less satisfying this week. If this memory does not fade then I will need to take the plunge sooner rather than later.

xeroian, August 2017

First off, big thanks to Chord Electronics for providing this tour, great opportunity to try the high-end device. Because English is not my native language, I feel that I am not able to express myself very well to describe all my impressions; let me try my best.

I believe we can all agree that Hugo2 is a beautiful device



I only want to say that despite its metallic appearance, it is actually pretty light-weighted. Although not convenient without bundling together, it is not too awkward to carry it along together with Questyle QP1R in my hand, walking and listening.




My review will focus on the performance comparison between: 1) Mojo and Hugo2 for Fitear To Go 334, using Questyle QP1R optical output as the digital source




2) Hugo2 and Questyle CMA 800i, using laptop USB as the digital source, driving HD800 and Fostex TH900




Hugo2 and Questyle CMA have very similar functionalities (except that CMA will not accept optical input), the major difference is of course the form factor.

I tried different types of music:

1). Also Sprach Zarathustra, the first piece from “Cinema Classics” SACD dsf file;

2) the second piece, “Sometimes I feel like a motherless child” in “Antiphone Blues” SACD dff file;

3) Carman Fantasy by Perman, CD rip FLAC;

4). Chinese Pipa music from 2015 The Perfect Sound (Hongkong) Demo SACD ISO file, last track.

It is easy to tell the difference between Mojo and Hugo2 with just a little listening (Fitear to go 334), although the sound signature is similar. Hugo2 obviously has more power. There is significant improvement in the sound stage and the resolution (fine details). The bass end is especially enhanced with Hugo2, giving a much larger and fuller sound stage. I have also tried Fiio X5ii Coax output as a digital source and there is obvious improvement with Hugo2. In the past, when I tried Fostex TH900 and HD800 on Mojo, the mid and high were kind of too sharp. Hugo2 drives the 2 large headphones pretty well with portable DAP as digital source.

The performance over large headphones, however, is compared more carefully with CMA 800i through the integrated USB DAC. With probably less than 1/5 of the 800i’s size, Hugo 2 drives the large headphones surprisingly similar to CMA 800i. Of the different music pieces I tested, I cannot easily tell there were too much difference between the two, even at the low bass end in “Also Sprach Zarathustra” and the orchestra opening of “Carman Fantasy”. However, when playing “Sometimes I feel like a motherless child” in the Album “Antiphone Blues”, I can feel CMA 800i presented with fuller sound stage (from better bass, I think), Hugo2 is a little thinner overall. On the other end, CMA 800i is somewhat too soft in dynamics, losing some sharpness in the mid and high end. Also, probably because of the enhanced bass, the resolution and fine details are a bit better from Hugo 2.

Overall, Hugo2 is a powerful DAC/AMP capable of driving large headphones like HD800 comparable to the similarly priced CMA 800i with the advantage of portability. It would be really nice to have one put in my office!