Hugo Upgrade???

eazyryder posted:

Well I have been A/B,ing for hours now between the hugo 1 (unplugged) and qutest. The qutest is a definite improvement over the hugo 1.

Its strange for me to say this , but I couldn't go back to my beloved hugo now. 

Well, at least you have peace of mind now because you don't have to worry about those x@##.. batteries!

michael17 posted:

Still very happy with the sound quality of the Hugo 1 and no battery problems yet.  I never trusted Chord’s advice to leave it charging all the time.  I always switch off and let it run down completely every few weeks.  

The sound (combined with the microrendu) stands up really well to other streamer dac combos, though my Lp12 is still a much more enveloping and captivating listen.  That said the thing which will lead me to change is the jumble of power supplies and wiring and the fiddliness of using the Hugo.

As a matter of interest have you upgraded the board on your microRendu or does your unit still have the original board? If it does, then I would recommend you check the firmware you have on the Rendu with a view to upgrading to version 2.7 if you don't already have this. My only issue with the Rendu since I got it has been that I have had to re-boot the device every now and again in order to make it visible on my network. Version 2.7 of the firmware is available as a very easy update by means of a replacement micro SD card for around £20. You simply remove the old card and slot in the new one. This latest firmware does away with the need to install bubbleUPnP server on the Rendu in order to get access to Tidal (and I think Qobuz as well). I don't think it's a coincidence but I have had absolutely no connectivity problems since installing the new firmware and doing away with bubbleUPnP server. It has been absolutely rock solid, and the whole package is also much more intuitive without the need for bubbleUPnP server.      

[@mention:1566878603876589]  - Hi Simon, in my earlier post I did not mean to imply that the fundamental design principles were in any way mystical, lacking scientific credibility, or the result of trial and error as such.  More that, as you more articulately explained, along the road things came to light that were not as expected, and that some the changes made, according to science, should not result in audible change.  Mainly I was thinking of the obsession to reduce noise floor modulation well below levels that are supposedly audible.  In the process of doing this, I've heard Rob say that the effects were not only audible, but also not always in the way expected.  I've not spoken to him personally, but have listened intently to several presentations he's made, understanding next to nothing technically, but some of the tweaking made along the road to developing DAVE did seem to be a voyage of discovery for him.  I wonder if the original Hugo code would have been the same if these discoveries had somehow been made earlier.

Hard one to answer... I do think it was more about implementation and refinement with DAVE and than other things.. but remember the Hugo was a culmination of lots of earlier products, theories and learnings from his earlier role of VLSI chip designer and binary arithmetic. Much of the capability and benefit of Hugo was about the availability of new powerful ultra low power technology.. that allowed FIR type low pass reconstruction filter kernels to be created with reduced processing and thermal noise.. which hitherto largely obscured the benefits of larger filter kernelswith more classic products. With DAVE compared to Hugo it was largely about increased internet noise decoupling, larger kernels and better input decoupling. Larger FIR filter kernels will provide potentially more benefit for higher definition sample reconstruction..

With regard to Hugo firmware, I understand it’s exceedingly tight and there is effectively no memory left to provide any other enhancement... which is why probably we have not seen any firmware changes.

I must confess I have not been to a Rob Watts presentation before, I have only discussed matters with him personally... I am sure they must be rather interesting.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 

With regard to the battery on the Hugo.. yes possibly it’s weak link along with a relatively poor USB interface... nothing is perfect. I now let my battery discharge completely or to ‘red’ about once a month... and I am advised from Chord by my dealer that will extend its life, Chord have twice repaired my Hugo in this area, both times free of charge... but since I have undertaken my regular monthly discharge, no issue at all.. and I only use galvanically isolated SPDIF.

 

 With regard to the battery discharge [@mention:1566878603876589]   when it is fully depleted how long do you leave it recharging again before using. I just had a panic where I had no music this morning and then remembered I hit the switch on the plug so now my TT is fully discharged. Unlike a laptop it doesn’t play immediately once plugged in, so I’m wondering for battery life am I just best to leave it until it is fully recharged and how long that might take?

thanks, John. 

.sjb

Sorry to slightly hijack the thread: Have folks, including those in Suffolk (-: checked out the m scaler with the Hugo TT by any chance? (Chord are working on a FAQ document for a while now). And/or m scaler with TT 2?

Cheers,

Stefan

I still have an original Chord 2Qute not liked by everyone on this forum because of its high gain output but it has served me well albeit as a secondary source and I have no desire to change it.

Hmack posted:

Japtimscarlet posted:

cat345 posted:

There are hundreds and hundreds of devices on the market with user replaceable batteries. Why on earth isn't the Hugo one of them? 

I'm guessing it depends on the user

I've not tried replacing a Hugo battery..but surely it cannot be harder than a mobile phone... And I've done a few of them with no issues 

Not quite as easy, unless you are a Wizard (or at least reasonably competent) with a soldering iron.

I changed the batteries in my Chord Hugo myself over a year ago without resorting to soldering. I simply spliced the wires from the new batteries to the wires from the old batteries (leaving the latter soldered to the circuit board). Electrical insulating tape completed the job although when the batteries next need changing I will probably use a better method of splicing (akin to that used for model boats with a connector). I think (but may be wrong) that Chord uses screw down connectors in the Hugo 2 to simplify battery changes. Potentially you could simply replace the soldered wire points on the Hugo 1 with screw down connectors although that would involve a small amount of soldering.