Chord Hugo 2 desktop DAC - QUTEST

That's ok CAT345. I did have to pause and think whether or not the Windows update could possibly have had an impact.

The Windows updates these days are more than a bit of a nuisance even if not the source of my Hugo problem. Whilst I have been relatively lucky so far I do know of a few people who have had quite a few driver related problems (with various devices) post large updates, and also quite a few instances of complex program settings being reset to default settings during updates.

My only significant problem (so far) is that I recently lost (as a result of a Windows 10 update) my Windows Edge 'Favourites' that I had compiled over a couple of years and stupidly hadn't  backed up.  

So how many taps we get with qutest and Blu2 ?

same and blu2 and dave : 1 million

SongStream posted:

I'm going to try the QUTEST, as finally Chord have made a DAC that makes sense to me.  For all the praise Hugo received around here, I couldn't be bothered with a battery powered DAC and the associated issues.  The output level of the 2Qute put me off that, and DAVE is just too expensive for my liking.  This though, makes a lot of sense to me.  Looking forward to hearing one. 

One thing that does fry my head a bit though is the 5v USB power input.  With all the talk around here about dedicated mains spurs, mains cables, a 555PS in to nDAC for good measure, and yet a 5v USB power input is sufficient to power a DAC that can rival anything Naim, or just about anyone else makes.....apparently.  Ultimately, I'll be the judge of that, but at £1200, I hope it's true.

 

 Yep. One of them is bluffing. It’s either power supply setup is overated or Chord’s tap is good enough where anything else is just diminishing  returns. Always nice to know there are still company out there that continuously push new techs. 

Does the Qutest have adjustable voltage out? That seems one of the nice features of the Hugo series so as to ‘optimise’ the levels and possibly other things going on, for the inputs of Naim NACs, setting the level does seem to make a real worthwhile improvement in musical flow, ease and enjoyment.

With regard to taps, it’s worth considering for maximum effect for a given number of taps then you need to use the lowest sample rate you can... so that means effectively the most benefit  from theses taps will from 44.1kHz encoded content  and least for 192kHz sample rate. The taps are important but other things are probably just as, if not more, important as hidef doesn’t sound noticeably shabbier, but does explain perhaps why red book sources sound so good. I raised this observation with the inventor of these devices, and was met with a knowing smile, a chuckle, and confirmation that this area is so interesting but still more to learn. However consumer marketeers love a number to sell with, so taps it is.....

Simon, I believe it can be set to 1, 2 or 3V output, so not quite the same as Hugo where you can fine tune it. 

Tnx - i set my Hugo to around  350mV pk to pk for best sound on my 552

Hi Simon

He states in public the increasing the sample rate reduces the inherent transient error, so probably less effect can be heard of his WTA filter, but it is still there, and of course at rates of 768KHZ sampling on indeed as he previously stated in public many years ago 1MHZ sampling, there is no probably no more transient timing error that can be heard so no need for a million taps.

However who is going to be able to sell/play/store of 768 KHZ files? It's a nightmare !

We never really got around to getting proper 192/24 hi-res files... 

Hi Ali, the matter he and I discussed was  really about the kernel size of the reconstruction filter... the more samples you have in the filter kernel (taps) the more accurate it will be. However the effect of the reconstruction filter is proportional to the ratio of the sample rate to the kernel size (logical if you think about it).. Therefore assuming the kernel size is static (ie the number of taps is fixed) then the effect of the reconstruction filter kernel size will reduce with higher sample rates... it was that we discussed

Sorry to distract from the thread topic, but I have managed to get my microRendu/Gustard U12/Hugo1 set up running again.

The HD USB input still appears to be completely dead, but it seems that my SPDIF problem was a badly fitting SPDIF cable. It's more or less impossible to seat the cable securely, but at least it is working for the time being and with both SD and HD source files from the MicroRendu/Gustard, which in any case is my preferred source. So I can live without the HD USB input.

I guess my shopping list has changed (for the time being) from a QUTEST to a well fitting SPDIF cable, although I might be tempted by the QUTEST if initial reviews are positive.

One final footnote. The Hugo is still sounding pretty good, and in this particular AV system not all that far away in respect of sound quality from the Klimax DS/1 I used briefly to confirm that the amp and speakers in this system were fine. The comparison is not quite so kind to the microRendu/Hugo in my main system, but it's sill very good indeed and excellent value for money by comparison (at new prices). 

No quarter posted:

Mr THX posted:

2Qutes only being worth £500 as trade in towards the Qutest should make owners realise chord are just in it to take your money. A product cycle with small incremental improvements that make the previous incarnation almost worthless.

Nobody is forcing you to trade it in,if you thought it was worth what you paid a couple of years ago...that should not change.For the record,I had the original Hugo,took a loss when I sold it,but that happens with any product.The Hugo 2,and I assume the Qutest IS significantly better than the original Hugo,I demo’d one at home,for over a month.

Well I thought I’d home demo a Hugo2 to see if it as good or even better than the original Hugo.... well after a few hours warm up I settled down to enjoy it through my 552... well to be positive the bass is slightly tighter, and perhaps a tad more punchier, but other than that it feels anaemic and comparatively lacking in emotion and that deep insight and passion of the original Hugo (via SPDIF) ... I will leave on over night to see of things improve. I am listening via SPDIF which the original Hugo excels at, USB was always less impressive and perhaps the Hugo2 is more at home with USB. I am also aware sample variations come into play, and my Hugo1 was better than a few other Hugo1s I tried.

Hmack posted:

I am sure that the problems we share are a complete coincidence, but have you had any luck with your microRendu issues yet?

....

I am not sure if this is potentially related to the battery issues a number of people have reported. Has anyone else experienced a similar problem with the Hugo?

...

I have posted an issue on the Roon forum and am awaiting their response. Now, I did have issues with the Hugo as well, which might have been battery related. Two weeks ago the Hugo was dead all of a sudden where I normally leave it on without bothering.

So might as well be a Hugo issue after all. Point is though that after repowering the microrendu everything is working again allbeit that I have to select the correct input mode on the Hugo again. Not sure if the hugo switches ports when something goes awrong or (again) the Hugo is not working ok anymore.

I'll post an update from the Roon forums when I have one.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Tnx - i set my Hugo to around  350mV pk to pk for best sound on my 552

That makes even the lowest 1V output on the Qutest seem high - maybe it explains why the 3V 2Qute never caught on with those who have a Naim NAC? 

Hi Simon

there are different filter settings on Hugo 2

not sure if you had the chance to try all of them ?

Hi Ali, yes tried them all... setting three (orange) seems the best so far with me.

Ok- interesting feedback from you.

The Mojo, Hugo 2 and Dave have the same tonal balance, which is different from Hugo 1.

Which SPDIF cable are you using for Hugo 1? I think for Hugo 2 you cannot use the same cable as it has no coax RCA input?

For Hugo 2 the coax input is in minijack format I can see from the pictures.

Would be interesting to compare them through USB input and the same source and same cables?

Hi, yes the the Hugo2 uses a mini jack, and am using a borrowed Chord Clearway cable..

i don’t think the Hugo2 is for me... I can hear it’s doing some things different to the Hugo and possibly a tiny bit of extra insight.. possibly in some mixes.. however I don’t find it as musical as the Hugo1 into my 552, in fact it’s a little boring... and I am not sure I totally like the balance which is a little drier than I am used to, where as the Hugo1 is sweeter.... 

Most of the reviews I have seen of the Hugo2 have been via USB and not SPDIF, and I wonder if the SPDIF performance of the Hugo2 is not seen as a priority... and the mini jack might suggest this...

Hi Simon

When I had the Hugo 2,I found it was ok when I put it between my Core and 272,but where it was really outstanding,was when I took the 272 out of the mix,and used it as a preamp.So it was Core>Hugo 2>amp...the thing is,I used my home theatre amp,an Anthem Mca 50,because I did not have the right cable to use my 250 DR.I ended up returning it though,because it’s small size bothered me,along with the mini coaxial input.This made me decide to save for the Dave.Another thing,not sure if you ever use headphones,but I found the Hugo 2 was a lot better than H1 with headphones.

No quarter posted:

Hi Simon

When I had the Hugo 2,I found it was ok when I put it between my Core and 272,but where it was really outstanding,was when I took the 272 out of the mix,and used it as a preamp.So it was Core>Hugo 2>amp...the thing is,I used my home theatre amp,an Anthem Mca 50,because I did not have the right cable to use my 250 DR.I ended up returning it though,because it’s small size bothered me,along with the mini coaxial input.This made me decide to save for the Dave.Another thing,not sure if you ever use headphones,but I found the Hugo 2 was a lot better than H1 with headphones.

How Do you rate hugo vs 272? İs it worth all the hassle ? After all you are wasting the streamer/dac part of the 272 

I kind of agree with both noquarter and Simon. I preferred Hugo 2 through my warm and coloured nighthawk headphones over Hugo TT but through my main system, neutral and accurate SCM40A speakers, I prefer Hugo TT, as Simon says, sounded sweeter even though Hugo 2 was doing some things better. System synergy and personal preferences are big factors when it comes to a DAC.

I didn't get the same results as analogue in that I found Hugo 2 and Dave to have very different tonal balances. Dave being the warmer and smoother by some margin.

Emre posted:

How Do you rate hugo vs 272? İs it worth all the hassle ? After all you are wasting the streamer/dac part of the 272 

I think if you wanted to use third party DACs you wouldn’t really start with the 272... the power of the 272 is the combined simplicity of a DAC optimised for its internal preamp. Perhaps look at a 282 upwards if wanting to use a Hugo etc..

agree the Hugo 1 is brighter than Mojo, Hugo 2 and Dave.... 

don't miss it to be honest, after I sold it to fund Dave...  & use Mojo for portable duties and Dave in the big system.

My opinion still : Mojo does a fantastic job for the size and cost.

ChrisSU posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Tnx - i set my Hugo to around  350mV pk to pk for best sound on my 552

That makes even the lowest 1V output on the Qutest seem high - maybe it explains why the 3V 2Qute never caught on with those who have a Naim NAC? 

I'm in a very small minority of just one I think that uses a 2Qute into a 282.  It is interesting what Simon said about Hugo units sounding different from one another because the one I tried didn't sound as good as the 2Qute and if I hand preffered it I could have done a straight swap for it.

The gain issue doesn't really bother me it just means that the volume dial gets used a bit less which is a bout the same as my phono stage anyway.

analogmusic posted:

agree the Hugo 1 is brighter than Mojo, Hugo 2 and Dave.... 

don't miss it to be honest, after I sold it to fund Dave...  & use Mojo for portable duties and Dave in the big system.

My opinion still : Mojo does a fantastic job for the size and cost.

Ali, no I don’t find the Hugo1 brighter than the Hugo2.. in fact the Hugo1 is probably slightly attenuated in the frequency extremes, and doesn’t seem to have the more prominent upper mid of the Hugo2, and the Hugo1 seems to have  a slightly warmer and slightly slower upper bass region... perhaps it’s this that makes it more musical.. I don’t know... but I feel  it’s these characteristics which are a synergy for many Naim amps.   Interestingly I found busy recordings on the Hugo2 sounded less clear than the Hugo1, and I wonder if that is down to possible shortcomgs on the SPDIF interface..., different presentation  or simply the Hugo2 is still running in.,,

analogmusic posted:

agree the Hugo 1 is brighter than Mojo, Hugo 2 and Dave.... 

don't miss it to be honest, after I sold it to fund Dave...  & use Mojo for portable duties and Dave in the big system.

My opinion still : Mojo does a fantastic job for the size and cost.

Never compared original Hugo but I perceived Hugo 2 to be brighter than Hugo TT and Dave.