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: 06 July 2014 by Josipo

Beside ferrite chokes I suggest attenuators. These bnc 75 Ohm attenuators that you put on receiver end contribute by attenuating signal level and therby noise level specially by reducing reflections in the coaxial cable between source and receiver end. These reflections appear because connectors are not true 75 Ohm and lead to impedance discontinuities along the Cable. You could try them in 6 dB steps. In my case best worked a 15 dB attenuation.

the SQ difference is really audible, more than changing digital cables

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Foxman50

Originally Posted by Josipo:

the SQ difference is really audible, more than changing digital cables

Josipo

What are these exactly. Are you able to post a link for them.

Graeme

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Josipo, bit confused by your post, did you say you are using attenuators on your SPDIF lead? interesting I use a 75 ohm characteristic impedance BNC to RCA (with no impedance challenging converters).. with a large choke clamped around the shield but no attenuator.very worthwhile to my ears. I have tried non 75 ohm impedance SPDIF leads and to my ears I prefer them less with my Hugo.

Simon

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Aleg

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

..... with a large choke clamped around the shield but no attenuator.very worthwhile to my ears. ....

Simon

what bandwidth should chokes filter on a coax spdif?

i see

- lower & broad band chokes : 1 MHz - 300 MHz

- broad band chokes : 25 MHz - 300 MHz

- higher frequency chokes : 200 MHz - 1000 MHz

Which is most suitable?

cheers

Aleg

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Josipo

connection wise, I use RCA to BNC adapter on the Hugo (I have to use one anyway, as the one supplied by Chord, because my coax cable connectors are too large for the Hugo casing), after that comes the attenuator as on the link:

http://www.pasternack.com/6db-...ator-pe7009-6-p.aspx

It has to be fixed attenuation in the complete frequency range to at least 2 GHz. After that comes bnc cable to NDX or other prefered source. Hope this explains

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Aleg, probably a bit of trial and error required here. I use a choke that is optimum between 30 MHz and 100MHz.

Simon

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Josipo, ok thanks for the info. I would make or arrange to have a 75 ohm CI lead made up with BNC to phono if you don't have one.

However if your solution works for you, keep on enjoying the music

Simon

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Josipo

The thing is that there are no RCA attenuators, just BNC. Therefor no need for BNC to phono lead. I guess that the gains the attenuator brings, exceeds potential losses the RCA to BNC adapter might carry.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Hi, I don't think it's about the losses per se, but more the impedance mismatch caused by an adapter. An adapter is better clearly than nothing, but is not optimal. In this application the impact is going to minimal, but I can clearly hear the difference between using an adapter and a direct connection.

Simon

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by GraemeH

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

Simon

Agreed re. adapter which I had to use briefly whilst DC1 BNC-RCA on order.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by PhilP

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

My goodness, lots added to this thread this pm.

Streamers and PSU into Hugo:

I certainly agree witH Gary the source quality affects the end product with the Hugo.....

I use the NDX into the Hugo, I did try my 555PS into the NDX, there might have been a slight change, but not much and certainly I couldn't say one was better than the other. I also tried the Powerline into the NDX and again marginal shift in sound, but not one being preferable.

I find that a bit surprising as I could hear a significant difference between NDX and NDX/XPS2 feeding a Devialet my preference being strongly for using the XPS2 which gave a cleaner, more open, less harsh sound. I haven't tried adding a choke to the S/PDIF cable but wouldn't be surprised if that made a difference, though if it does then I don't know why Naim haven't spotted that and added a choke to the DC1.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Foxman50

Originally Posted by GraemeH:

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

Simon

Agreed re. adapter which I had to use briefly whilst DC1 BNC-RCA on order.

GraemeH

Are you saying you used the BNC to RCA adaptor on an RCA to RCA coax digital cable, then got the BNC to RCA DC1 cable and the later was better.

Graeme

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Interesting.. I think the Hugo raises the standard of what you get used to when you listen. I was listening to Clare Teal (BBC R2 FM) this evening on my NAT03 and Hiline into my 282. This is usually an outstanding source. However Clare was playing some familiar big band numbers this evening, that I had recently heard on my Hugo with my own copies... The FM signal sounded ever so slightly clipped at times and lacked some of that natural 'bounce' I now get from the Hugo...

Now it's possible my NAT03 has started to just go off, or the beeb have been fiddling with the signal path/levels. This was my first 'serious' FM music session (excluding R4) since I got my Hugo.... Hmmmm

Simon

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by DavidDever

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

Simon

Worth getting your tuner adjusted at the factory - not nearly as complicated as NAT 01/02 but still worth a tune-up, so to speak....

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Jan-Erik Nordoen

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

And I think the FIR reconstruction filter having a larger number of kernel samples (taps) than common elsewhere and having a low DSP noise floor helps as well.

Simon

Agreed. Had it been me who had said that, I would be accused of hyperbole, or picking a random specification

Jan

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by cvrle

A question is raised if Hugo is truly a game changer or not. First of all we would need to establish some kind of criteria what that exactly means, and what the boundaries are, that we all agree upon. Otherwise, it is hard to accomplish some kind of agreement. I have no doubt about it at all. Why... simply it delivers SQ reserved only for those with the deep pockets. Hugo isn't cheap either, but it is way less than what we had to pay for such a performance. I was one of those who could only dream about, but not any more. I am enjoying my collection like never before.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Foxman50

Originally Posted by cvrle:

Those that have heard it agree they prefer a �1400 DAC to an �8k PSU DAC combination. Game changer !

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Foxman50

Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:

Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

And I think the FIR reconstruction filter having a larger number of kernel samples (taps) than common elsewhere and having a low DSP noise floor helps as well.

Simon

Agreed. Had it been me who had said that, I would be accused of hyperbole, or picking a random specification

Jan

Just for consistencies sake, your talking hyperbole and picking a random specification.

Graeme

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by analogmusic

Aleg,

you do not have the right to use abusive language on this forum.

I have reported this to the moderator.

You think you can come here and not be challenged on technical grounds?

and if you are, then you use words like A**hole?

Originally Posted by Aleg:

Originally Posted by analogmusic:

Gary my post wasn't addressed at you at all.

It was for Aleg

the challenge with building up impossible expectations, is that it may cause some people to purchase unwisely.

and they might be disappointed later on.

my expecation is that it should sound amazingly good with even a Mac mini, and exceed all my expecations with an NDS. But wait a sec.

is that the NDS or the Hugo that sounds so good.

Not having a go at you Gary, really , just putting all the hugo hype where it belongs.

Analog as....le I never said anything about NDS-s, so don't me into your shit either.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by analogmusic

Exactly my point also. is this really such a revolution on sound, or just another flavour that everyone is going ga-ga over

I guess the new toy syndrome, before the next one comes along.

Originally Posted by Char Wallah:

So why the emphasis on Hugo if you have acknowledged that, as always, source is the key to good/better sound quality? Surely the Hugo's function in any Naim system is an auxillary one, not central.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by analogmusic

You talk as if 1400 GBP is small change.

I mean someone who has spend more than 3000 GBP on an NDX doesn't exactly want to use it as a pure streamer, into another battery operated DAC that costs 1400.

if the hugo costed 200 GBP then ok, but at 1400 GBP this is not chump change.

Originally Posted by GraemeH:

Originally Posted by analogmusic:

What experience is that?

Have you tried a PS555 head to head on the NDX and comapred that with a Chord Hugo on the NDX?

Originally Posted by GraemeH:

I'd say now having the option to add either a) A �6k 555PS to your naim streamer of choice to improve the SQ or b) Adding a �1.4K dac to (ime) further improve the SQ over and above the 555PS, a bit of a 'game changer'...

As I say, only speaking from experience of course.

Umm...yes. Otherwise why would I say such unless I couldn't help speculating on unlived experiences and/or I were a complete fool?

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by lovethatsound

I suggest nobody reply 2 analog posts the guy just talks a load of rubbish.

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by KRM

In reply to Watt and Graeme,

The (apparent) fact that Robert Watts found a way to make a better DAC for less doesn't force Chord to charge less for it. I'm pretty sure that most Hi Fi manufacturers price based on what the market will bear, not cost plus. What margin do you imagine do you imagine Naim makes on a Hicap and is it the same as the one they will mke on a Muso? Perhaps it's happy conincidence that each amp costs about twice as much to make as the one below it in the hierarchy?

Maybe the real game change is in Chord's gasp of economics?

Keith

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

@Analogmusic what has the cost of components got to do with replay performance ? i say not a lot... It's about satisfaction of the replay of your system to your ears in your room.

If one sets expectations based solely on cost of components rather than performance experienced I can see how one can become easily confused, which perhaps explains some of the comments in this thread.

It also perhaps explains the differences between those that judge what they hear (such as myself) to those that judge with what they pay.

To me this hobby (and the main theme of this thread IMO) is about enjoyment of recorded music, and how best to do it in your personal situation.... not a stock market... but I respect the fact the latter may important for some, but this probably not the best thread for that sort of 'asset value' discussion.

Simon

Posted on: 06 July 2014 by joerand

Originally Posted by analogmusic:

Aleg,

you do not have the right to use abusive language on this forum.

I have reported this to the moderator.

You think you can come here and not be challenged on technical grounds?

and if you are, then you use words like A**hole?

Frank honesty should not be confused with abusive language.