NDX and Chord Hugo

Posted by: Foxman50 on 18 April 2014

I have been contemplating adding a DAC to my NDX/XPS2 to see (or should that be hear) what it can bring to the party. And so thought it about time i made inroads into Having a few home demos. After looking around at products that are within my budget i came across the Chord Hugo DAC.

Although it is meant to be a portable headphone unit, it can be used as a full line level fixed DAC.

The dealer lent me a TQ black digital coax lead, which have twist grip plugs. This was required as the present batch of Hugo's have a case design fault that wont allow any decent cable to fit, soon to be rectified. Thankfully the TQ just manages to hang on to the coax port.

Once all connected and gone through the minimal setup procedure of the Hugo, what does the red LED mean again, i left it to warm up for half an hour.

Poured a beer and sat down for an evenings listening.

What was that, where did that come from, that's what that instrument is. OMG, as my little'n would say, Where is it getting all this detail from.

After spending last night and today with it, all i can say is that it has totally transformed my system from top to bottom. I never considered my NDX to be veiled or shut in, not even sure that's the correct terms. All i can say is its opened up the sound stage and space around instruments. Everything I've put through it has had my toes, feet and legs tapping away to the music.

Even putting the toe tapping, the resolution the clarity to one side, what its greatest achievement for me has been in making albums that I've had trouble listening too enjoyable now.

One added bonus is that it has made the XPS redundant. I cannot hear any difference with it in or out of the system.

While i thought a DAC may make a change in the degree of the jump from ND5 to NDX, i was not prepared for this. Anyone looking at adding a PSU to there NDX may want to check this unit out first.

For me this has to be the bargain of the year.

Posted on: 29 June 2014 by George J

I would get a 2012 [current] model, just as the new one is released, for a good discount!

The 2012 MAC Mini is superb!

ATB from George

Posted on: 29 June 2014 by Big Bill

Originally Posted by Wat:

Big Bill

HDMI out and wireless keyboard both work fine.

I would not use a Mac as part of a UPnP streaming setup though - you can, but Vortexbox does it better in my view. You can use the Mac as player of files on your NAS using NFS, CIFS/Samba or another file sharing protocol. I use a DAS, but NAS would work too.

Vortexbox, Uniti will work too. The only limitation of Uniti is it can't use a DAC like Hugo and then act as amplifier (i.e. digital out and then analogue back in - I have a UQ and can't do that with it).

There are many ways to play digital music these days.

All the best, Wat

Yeh but it has to integrate in with my other components, my uniti connects to my NSA via upnp so my new box of tricks must do the same.

Posted on: 29 June 2014 by analogmusic

hmmm, yosemite will be a free upgrade, i would purchase it now..

most of the OS improvments in speed have already been made in Mavericks, such as memory compression.

whatever you do, buy a computer with an SSD option.

Once you experience SSD, there is no way back to the slow HDD experience.

Posted on: 29 June 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Originally Posted by analogmusic:

Once you experience SSD, there is no way back to the slow HDD experience.

I agree with this completely..

but aren't we drifting off topic again?

Simon

Posted on: 29 June 2014 by analogmusic

I once purchased a DAC called the Altmann attraction DAC, whch is a battery powered DAC, with a 16 bit true resistor chip, the phillips TD 1541, with the filter removed.

It sounded very, very good to my ears, and was really as good as some very expensive DACs around, including those from Chord.

Timbres were amazingly realistic, and very close to vinyl.

However I soon realized that once you remove the filter, high frequencies are toned down a bit, and as I said before there is a lot more to analog replay, whether Vinyl or Tape than removing a filter from a DAC chip and running it off a battery PSU.

As Neil Young often said, you can fool yourselves, even with the Hugo, into thinking that you have heard the music, but unfortunately, with digital, my view is that I completely agree with Neil Young, that you haven't felt it.

it's a fairly easy test. Play a real Piano, and play the same notes through a Hugo. or any other DAC.

I must say that with DAC V1, it really gets the replay and voices of singers amazingly close to real. And the DAC V1 has PRAT in spades, and makes concert videos and movies amazingly fun to watch.

I think Neil also said something like "turn up the volume, close the windows, but you just can't make the snare drum really sound" with digital.

For all the enthusiasm about the Hugo, I think it's good to balance out with some realistic views about what it can and cannot do.

I sold off the attraction DAC soon afterwards by the way.

I found that DSP software with a good DAC sounded best to my ears compared to the attraction DAC or indeed any expensive DAC and I didn't want a car battery in my home either

With a DAC V1 and DSP software, I don't feel the need for analog replay.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Foxman50

Originally Posted by analogmusic:

I once purchased a DAC called the Altmann attraction DAC, whch is a battery powered DAC, with a 16 bit true resistor chip, the phillips TD 1541, with the filter removed.

It sounded very, very good to my ears, and was really as good as some very expensive DACs around, including those from Chord.

Analog have you heard Hugo to know this.

Timbres were amazingly realistic, and very close to vinyl.

Again have you heard Hugo to know this

it's a fairly easy test. Play a real Piano, and play the same notes through a Hugo. or any other DAC.

Ive yet to hear any HiFi do this totally convincingly, with the limited kit ive heard, vinyl or digital.

I must say that with DAC V1, it really gets the replay and voices of singers amazingly close to real. And the DAC V1 has PRAT in spades, and makes concert videos and movies amazingly fun to watch.

I dont think anyone has questioned this in this thread

I think Neil also said something like "turn up the volume, close the windows, but you just can't make the snare drum really sound" with digital.

For all the enthusiasm about the Hugo, I think it's good to balance out with some realistic views about what it can and cannot do.

Who's views are you using though. You have not heard it

I sold off the attraction DAC soon afterwards by the way.

I found that DSP software with a good DAC sounded best to my ears compared to the attraction DAC or indeed any expensive DAC and I didn't want a car battery in my home either

With a DAC V1 and DSP software, I don't feel the need for analog replay.

Hang on you have just counter argued your complete post. Either digital is not good enough or it is. Oh dear analog you have not thought this through have you. You wont reply to this but you really need to have a listen to Hugo. Go on you know deep down you want too.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Big Bill

Originally Posted by Wat:

Mac Mini is not for you Bill - I don't use UPnP, but if you want a UPnP box then Vortexbox is more appropriate than a Mac Mini.

Wat you have confused me again! I thought that VortexBox is one of two things (a) a upnp server all boxed up and ready to go or (b) it is a software suite that allows you to do the same thing on your own hardware.

But I already stream from my QNAP NAS!

I have to say though, that the spec of the VortexBox box looked very good for the money though.

ps I also use a SSD on my latest build PC and yes they do speed things up. The only thing that worries me is their reliability, although I have yet to have a problem. But I have heard some horror stories of them failing.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by nbpf

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Originally Posted by Wat:

Mac Mini is not for you Bill - I don't use UPnP, but if you want a UPnP box then Vortexbox is more appropriate than a Mac Mini.

But I already stream from my QNAP NAS!

I have to say though, that the spec of the VortexBox box looked very good for the money though.

Maybe it is worth reading the short intro http://vortexbox.org/about: "VortexBox is a free, open source (GPL v3), quick-install ISO that turns your unused computer into an easy-to-use music server/jukebox."

In a nutshell: VortexBox is a GNU / Linux distribution (just like Debian, Fedora, Red Hat, Mint, Suse and many more) stripped down and optimized for serving audio files.

As you can see from the "Features" list (on the same page), however, it supports quite a number of services. You can probably deinstall / stop those applications you do not need but, as I already mentioned, I find it easier to start with a minimal installation and add what I need.

This is of course my personal preference. If you feel you do not have enough experience in setting up a minimal Debian system, you can start with a full fledged system (VortexBox, OS X or whatever OS you feel confident with) and fine-tune later. There is quite a lot of information on how to optimize OS X and Linux systems available and, as far as you have a machine you do not need, you can play around with different systems and installations for a while before you make a choice.

You could also consider buying a Naim server. The UnitiServe, for instance, roughly implements the functionalities of VortexBox in a dedicated hardware. I would have certainly opted for a UnitiServe (instead of buying a fit-PC3) if it had been based on an open system. It is probably possible to install Debian or VortexBox on a UnitiServe as well but I could find very little information on this subject and, if I had, I wouldn't anyway post it here to avoid breaking the rules.

I also have to say that I do not really understand what you want to do with the system you are envisaging. If you simply want to serve files which are stored in your QNAP (via a UPnP server different from the ones supported by the QNAP) to a UPnP client then, as I already mentioned, a raspberry pi connected to your local network would be fine.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Big Bill

Originally Posted by nbpf:

Sorry I have obviously not been clear. I have a QNAP NAS which is running MinimServer and I currently use a UnitiLite in my main system to play music.

I want to setup, on a second system that I have, a new streamer and so I have the following options:

(a) get another Uniti, I was thinking of a Qute to keep costs down, or

(b) use a PC in this room.

Now option (a) is nice and simple and may well be the way I go or maybe a similar product to the Uniti. Option (b) will work I know but it does have issues. Computers are noisy and in general not living room friendly. So if I go this route I will need something neat, small and quiet. Thus I am thinking of a fanless PC (Linux to save me purchasing an OS) or a Mac Mini.

But this PC, if I go route (b) will NOT be used as a server!

One of the problems with this site is that we post about kit we have or we have an interest in owning and assume that all the readers know what we are talking about and I guess I have been guilty about that.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by nbpf

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Originally Posted by nbpf:

Sorry I have obviously not been clear. I have a QNAP NAS which is running MinimServer and I currently use a UnitiLite in my main system to play music.

I want to setup, on a second system that I have, a new streamer and so I have the following options:

(a) get another Uniti, I was thinking of a Qute to keep costs down, or

(b) use a PC in this room.

I do not think you actually have such options. You can certainly use a computer to set up a server that delivers digital data to a DAC --- e.g., a Hugo not to go completely OT --- or to a streamer.

But you will not be able to replace a Uniti with a standard PC (or Mini Mac) without severe losses in sound quality. I guess your alternatives are 1) get another streamer, served by the same NAS and 2) get a PC (or Mini Mac) and a DAC. If you are happy with streaming you should probably go for 1).

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Big Bill

Originally Posted by nbpf:

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Originally Posted by nbpf:

Sorry I have obviously not been clear. I have a QNAP NAS which is running MinimServer and I currently use a UnitiLite in my main system to play music.

I want to setup, on a second system that I have, a new streamer and so I have the following options:

(a) get another Uniti, I was thinking of a Qute to keep costs down, or

(b) use a PC in this room.

I do not think you actually have such options. You can certainly use a computer to set up a server that delivers digital data to a DAC --- e.g., a Hugo not to go completely OT --- or to a streamer.

Why would I get severe losses in sound quality if I use a computer (Mac Mini, Linus fanless box) to front something like a Hugo? Will it send out different bits and bytes to the DAC than my Uniti does to its internal DAC? Don't understand.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Bart

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

31 pages, and we've come full circle. Bits are bits; it doesn't matter.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Foxman50

Originally Posted by Bart:

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

31 pages, and we've come full circle. Bits are bits; it doesn't matter.

Bart

Don't know how you come to that conclusion, i'm as confused by nbfp's comment as Bill clearly is.

Graeme

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Big Bill

Originally Posted by Bart:

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

31 pages, and we've come full circle. Bits are bits; it doesn't matter.

Yes, can you please explain Bart. What will be difference about the two digital datastreams? I am willing to listen.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by sjbabbey

I think that nbpf's comment relating to loss of sound quality was made on the misunderstanding that you might be thinking about using the computer bare I.e. without an external DAC, for playback.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Big Bill

Originally Posted by sjbabbey:

I think that nbpf's comment relating to loss of sound quality was made on the misunderstanding that you might be thinking about using the computer bare I.e. without an external DAC, for playback.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.

You might well be right and of course the word 'severe' wouldn't be strong enough in that case and re-reading his post makes me think that is exactly what he meant.

Not sure what Bart was on about though?

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by nbpf

Originally Posted by nbpf:

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Originally Posted by nbpf:

Sorry I have obviously not been clear. I have a QNAP NAS which is running MinimServer and I currently use a UnitiLite in my main system to play music.

I want to setup, on a second system that I have, a new streamer and so I have the following options:

(a) get another Uniti, I was thinking of a Qute to keep costs down, or

(b) use a PC in this room.

I do not think you actually have such options. You can certainly use a computer to set up a server that delivers digital data to a DAC --- e.g., a Hugo not to go completely OT --- or to a streamer.

I'm probably keeping on misunderstanding what you want to do, sorry !

My understanding was that, in option (b), you want to replace your Uniti(Lite) with a PC and you do not want the PC to work as a server.

This would imply that you want to use the PC as a streamer (in place of the UnitiLite to be moved elsewhere). Am I missing something ? In this role (of a streamer), the PC would act as a UPnP client + DAC (which is what the UnitiLite also does, beside being, additionally, a CD player and an integrated amp), the analog signal would come from the internal sound card of the PC and be of lower quality.

On the other hand, if you use the PC to drive a DAC (as I suggested in 2)) you will be fine. But then the PC will act as a server for the DAC (and, depending on where you plan to get your data from, possibly also as a UPnP client) which I understood is not what you wanted to have (you wrote: "But this PC, if I go route (b) will NOT be used as a server!")

Maybe it would be helpful if you would write down the chain of devices you plan to deploy. I, for instance, use PC > USB2DAC > DAC > Amp > Speakers.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by nbpf

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Originally Posted by sjbabbey:

I think that nbpf's comment relating to loss of sound quality was made on the misunderstanding that you might be thinking about using the computer bare I.e. without an external DAC, for playback.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.

You might well be right and of course the word 'severe' wouldn't be strong enough in that case and re-reading his post makes me think that is exactly what he meant.

That's correct: I understood you were thinking about using the computer bare, sorry !

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by nbpf

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Why would I get severe losses in sound quality if I use a computer (Mac Mini, Linus fanless box) to front something like a Hugo?

You wouln't (except if you set up your server to do something really wrong, e.g., resampling)

Originally Posted by Big Bill:

Will it send out different bits and bytes to the DAC than my Uniti does to its internal DAC? Don't understand.

Hopefully not !

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Brilliant

Originally Posted by Foxman50:

Originally Posted by Hmack:

Hi Brilliant,

I was interested in your post, because my initial reaction when I plugged the Hugo into my system was much the same as yours. I have 2 systems (using Linn Klimax Renew and Naim ND5XS), and the Hugo was intended to be used in conjunction with the ND5XS in my second system.

Given the reviews on this site and elsewhere, I was expecting that (especially after the comparisons with the likes of the NDS/XP555 and nDAC/XP555), the improvement to my ND5XS would be spectacular. However, it wasn't initially so! Like you, I found the sound to be super-smooth, very polite, but certainly not the revelation I had been hoping for.

However, I hadn't really spent much time setting it up, so thought I would check a few things, read the basic manual thoroughly and try again before posting back to the forum.

I discovered:

1. My coaxial phono lead didn't fit properly. The gentlest nudge of the hugo would dislodge it

2. I hadn't set the 'volume bypass' control properly

3. In connecting up the unit, I had inadvertently set one of the 'crossfeed' modes on

I found a phono adapter that resolved the earlier problem, carefully set the volume bypass and made sure the crossfeed default was set to 'off' and tried again

This time, the musical presentation of the Hugo was entirely different, and to my ears immediately significantly better than that of the internal DAC in the ND5XS. I'm still at an early stage, and it's too awkward to try a quick comparison in my Linn Klimax Renew based system (The Klimax Renew does not have digital inputs or outputs), but from memory, the Hugo does sound pretty similar (possibly even better) than the Klimax Renew when I had it hooked up to my second system. The over politeness has certainly gone - still no evidence of harshness, but now absolutely no lack of dynamics and impact.

I would suggest that you double check that everything has been set up correctly in your system.

I'm now beginning to think that the Hugo does live up to its hype. I will in time get around to trying it in more revealing Magneplanar 3.6R/Primare 928 system, but probably not for some time.

However, although I am now delighted with the Hugo from a musical and sound quality perspective, I do have to point out a number of pretty serious operational issues with the device.

1. It doesn't look great sitting in my Hi-Fi rack, despite the pretty lights (which I actually like, and which work very well in respect of indicating source digital frequency when you get to know them.

2. The settings all switch back to their defaults when the unit is powered down, meaning that whenever you power back up you have to through the extremely fiddly process of setting volume bypass and source selection. The controls to operate these are far too difficult to use (especially the volume bypass).

3. This morning I discovered that the power cable must have worked loose yesterday, and that I had obviously been using the DAC on battery power only yesterday. The battery was flat when I tried to use my system this morning. I had to charge it up for about 30 minutes before I could re-configure the settings - pretty annoying! Again, the power supply connection should be more robust.

As a matter of interest, does everyone else leave the unit permanently switched on in order to avoid having to re-configure it every day?

Anyway, in summary from me for the time being, its a definite thumbs up for the Hugo from a sound quality perspective. I'll continue to listen for a week or so and then try reverting back to the ND5XS on its own to hopefully confirm my opinion.

Hi Hmack

i may have mentioned previously that i leave mine powered 24/7 so no need to keep resetting the configuration. Although i have to say even if there was a power cut it isnt that much of an issue to reset it, however i think its an oversight to not have the Hugo remember its last setting.

If memory serves i believe i read that this was something that Mr Watts tried to incorporate but didnt have programming room. No idea how that works at all, but as i said, so far ive not had to reset it once.

Like all kit it may be worth trying different interconnect cables to get the sound you want. But at the end of the day it may just not be to Brilliants taste. Thats why its hard to say one product is better than another. Its all down to the individual and how they like there music reproduced.

Graeme

Hmack, Graeme

I have played the Hugo for the 100hrs and checked the setup while trying different cables to maximize its performance according to my tastes. These initial impressions remain:

The Hugo impresses greatly with resolution and imaging. Instruments sound real and it is easy to follow them in a mix. A highly resolved and polished presentation, both melodically and rhythmically and seemingly free of any harshness or 'hardness'.

and as for the following statement, there has been some improvement but not enough (for me) over the 100 hrs burn in :

... IMHO it sounds 'polite' for lack of a better word. I do not get the usual goose bumps nor the adrenaline flow that I am addicted to. ."

As an example, while playing the first track (Was Once A Gambler) of the Lightnin' Hopkins 'Texas Blues' CD - I find that Hugo emotionally 'lightens' the normally dark (blue) mood to the extent that it could have been a different take. A slight sonic 'lightness' but an emotionally significant alteration to the album.

Otherwise I agree that Hugo is a remarkable DAC in almost every other way!

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Foxman50

Hi Brilliant

Shame you cant get it to work for you, but at least you have given it a try. Will you be looking for an alternative, if so keep us informed.

Graeme

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by GraemeH

As someone who has experienced an NDAC fed by first an ND5XS and then an NDX I'd not discount the streamer from affecting the sonic signature of the Hugo. This may account for the 'lightness' that some of us are unaware of?

Listening to Ry Cooder's 'Boomers Story', an album which has outlasted numerous systems with me over nearly 30 years and not a hint of 'lightness'.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Brilliant

Originally Posted by Foxman50:

Hi Brilliant

Shame you cant get it to work for you, but at least you have given it a try. Will you be looking for an alternative, if so keep us informed.

Graeme

I doubt that there is a product that 'does it all'. It is a world of compromise. I will keep the wonderful Hugo in another setup I use for classical and pop music, which I listen to differently I suppose.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by Brilliant

Originally Posted by GraemeH:

Listening to Ry Cooder's 'Boomers Story', an album which has outlasted numerous systems with me over nearly 30 years and not a hint of 'lightness'.

Hi G

The 'lightness' I am referring to is a failure to fully evoke the 'emotion' I expect (PN -not stating accuracy or inaccuracy here). I did try all its inputs, before settling on the SPDIF coax as the closest to what I am looking for. This made it easy to use a CD player as a 'transport' for the Hugo in a 'direct' comparison - the 'external factor' being just the coax cable.

Posted on: 30 June 2014 by GraemeH

Originally Posted by Brilliant:

... is a failure to fully evoke the 'emotion' I expect (PN -not stating accuracy or inaccuracy here)...

Ahh. Much more subjective then - and I don't mean that pejoratively.

If you don't connect to the music through it then clearly it's not for you.